Strasbourg, 19 July 2000 DECS/EDU/CIT (2000) 16

COUNCIL FOR CULTURAL CO-OPERATION (CDCC)

PROJECT ON “EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRATIC

CITIZENSHIP”

Strategies for Learning

Democratic Citizenship

Dr. Karlheinz Duerr, Landeszentrale fuer politische Bildung Baden-Wuerttemberg

Prof. Dr. Vedrana Spajic-Vrkaš, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Philosophy,
Department of Education
Dr. Isabel Ferreira Martins, Ministry of Education, Secretariado Entreculturas, Lisbon
 2

The opinions expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the official policy of the Council for Cultural Co-operation of the Council of Europe nor that
of the Secretariat.
All correspondence concerning this report or the reproduction or translation of all or part of
the document should be addressed to the Directorate General IV Council of Europe F-67075
Strasbourg Cedex.

.
 3

In 1997, the Education for Democratic Citizenship (EDC) project was set up with the aim to
find out which values and skills individuals require in order to become participating citizens,
how they can acquire these skills and how they can learn to pass them on to others.

A Project Group composed of education ministries representatives, specialists, international

institutions and NGOs active in the field of education for democratic citizenship was set up at
the beginning of the project. The project activities grounded in theory as well as in practical
everyday life, have been divided between three sub-groups. They worked on

A – concepts / definitions :

Aims: to work out a framework of concepts for education for democratic citizenship together
with the appropriate terminology and to identify the basic skills required for democratic
practices in European societies.

B – pilot projects / sites od citizenship:

Aims: to identify, learn from, compare, appraise and encourage the development of
citizenship sites (innovative and empowering initiatives in which citizens participate actively
in society, especially at the local level). Partnerships between the different actors involved in
education for citizenship (e.g. schools, parents, the media, businesses, local authorities, adult
education establishments) are identified and supported.

C – training and support systems :

Aims: to identify different methods and ways of learning, teaching and training, to build up a
network of multipliers, adult educators, teacher trainers in education for democratic
citizenship, to exchange information and experience in the field of EDC and to create fora for
reflection and discussion.

The many activities carried out between 1997 and 2000 resulted, inter alia, in the project’s
synthesis report and three complementary studies presented at the project’s final conference
(Strasbourg, 14-16 September 2000).

In addition to the present report, these are :

- Education for democratic citizenship : a Lifelong Learning Perspective, by César

Birzéa, the synthesis report of the overall EDC project
- Basic concepts and core competencies for education for democratic citizenship, by
François Audigier
- Sites of citizenship: Empowerment, participation and partnerships by Liam Carey and
Keith Forrester.

Further information on the EDC project’s activities, studies, reports and publications can be
found on the project’s internet website: http://culture.coe.int/citizenship
4
 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.1.1 Learning for Democratic Citizenship: An instrument for developing a culture of rights and
responsibilities 8
1.1.1.1. The relationship between rights and responsibilities 10
1.1.1.2. Rights and responsibilities as an educational task 12
1.1.1.3. The changing environment of EDC 14
1.1.2 Learning for democratic citizenship in Europe – the current situation 15
1.1.3.2. East-west: similarities and differences in changing contexts 27
1.1.4 Educational reforms and learning for democratic citizenship 30

1.1.5 Education for democratic citizenship and related approaches 34

1.1.5.1. Education for democratic citizenship and civic education 35
1.1.5.2. Education for democratic citizenship and human rights education 36
1.1.5.3. Education for democratic citizenship and intercultural education 37
1.1.5.4. Education for democratic citizenship and peace education 39
1.1.5.5. Education for democratic citizenship and global education 40
1.2.1 Formal Education 41
1.2.1.1. The School 41
1.2.1.2. Teacher qualifications in education for democratic citizenship 43
1.2.1.3 Higher education and education for democratic citizenship 47
1.2.2. Adult Education 48

2.1. Education for democratic citizenship – general characteristics 56

2.1.1. Core Concepts/Values 59
2.1.2. Skills 59

2.2. Skills and competencies of the actors in education for democratic citizenship 60
2.2.1. The Learner and the "Teacher" 60
2.2.2. School and the society 62
2.2.2.2 The “Socialisation Function” of school 63
2.2.3. The individual and society 65

2.3. Education for Democratic Citizenship Methodology – An 66

Overview 66
2.3.1 The interdependence of objectives, content and methodology to 66
Education for Democratic Citizenship 66
2.3.2 Selection of subject-matter 67
2.3.3 Formulation of objectives in the transmitting process 67
2.3.4 Organisation of the transmitting process 67
2.3.5 Methods for presenting the subject-matter 68
2.3.6 Evaluation of the results 69

2.4. Conditions for Edc 70

2.4.1. School related conditions 70
2.4.2. Society related conditions 71

2.5. Guiding principles (Conclusions) 72

 6

INTRODUCTION

The fundamental changes that have taken place in Europe since the beginning of the last
decade of the 20th Century have led to new and complex challenges in the established as well
as in the new democracies. While countries in Western Europe are faced with accelerating
economic, social, technological and political changes, countries in Central and Eastern
Europe seek to consolidate their newly established political and economic orders, overcome
the heritage of the past to develop a new political culture and instil in their citizens the ideas
of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.
Both developments are characterised by the removal, replacement or suppression of
traditional ideas, values, conventions, and norms of behaviour. A comprehensive rebuilding
of social, economic and political structures is taking place everywhere; it requires new
competencies, skills and knowledge and learning processes are at the core of these
developments. It is only by learning that comprehension, commitment and knowledge can be
transmitted, acquired and shared. In this integrated process, the very idea and practice of
learning itself is changing. Learning is no longer restricted to the earlier stages of human life,
to formal systems like schools and universities or professional training processes. In this
period of rapid, constant and enduring change, learning becomes a life-long aim of
individuals, societies and states.
New objectives and approaches are required for learning processes in society and the
economy alike. Autonomous and critical thinking, readiness to accept responsibilities and
innovative attitudes are some of the criteria that determine modern educational processes.
Democracy is the political system that allows such learning. However, if it is true that,
historically, situations of deep-reaching change have contributed to increasing instability,
democratic values should be seen as the core element for all to learn.
Citizens, who are able to behave in an autonomous, critical, participative and responsible way
form the central requirement for any society that respects the principles of democracy, human
rights, peace, freedom and equality. If, as Abraham Lincoln stated, democracy is to be
understood as "government for the people, by the people, and of the people", then three
important conclusions can be drawn:
- Firstly, the term "citizen" does not merely imply a legal status within the political system;
rather, it implies competencies, skills and capabilities that must be transmitted in a life-
long learning process.
- Secondly, Learning for Democratic Citizenship is a comprehensive task that cannot take
place in formal institutions alone, it is rather learnt in multifaceted formal and non-formal
settings involving the co-ordination and co-operation of the relevant institutions and
organisations.
- Thirdly, during the learning process, the relationship between the transmitter and the
learner changes dramatically. The question of how people (i.e. individual citizens) are to
meet the requirements inferred on them by citizenship in an effective manner will become
more and more important.
 7

These three conclusions cover the central issues of this study:

♦ The first calls for a reappraisal of the changes taking place in learning as well as the
contexts, contents and requirements of learning processes that form the cornerstones of
education for democracy. The study raises questions on these matters particularly in Part
1, Chapter 1.1 and in Part 2, Chapter 2.1

♦ The second raises the question of the institutional framework in Learning for Democratic
Citizenship. Even though this framework is still characterised by the dominance of the
formal educational sector, in the future it must be brought into close interaction with
another increasingly important area in democratic learning i.e. society. The study
describes these issues in Part 1, Chapter 1.2 and Part 2, Chapter 2.2

♦ The third conclusion underlines the importance of methods and approaches in successful
and sustained Learning for Democratic Citizenship. Since formal education is no longer
the only supplier of knowledge, it is faced with increasing pressure to develop more
effective and attractive forms of learning. Innovative methods of teaching and learning
will be decisive factors in gaining the acceptance and motivation of learners. The study is
primarily directed at practitioners (teachers and multipliers) and a comprehensive survey
of methods and practices is undertaken in Part 2. Furthermore, the authors felt that there
was also a need to make a compilation of exemplary models of “good practice” from all
over Europe. The papers, materials, project descriptions and curricular concepts collected
from a large number of European countries are summarised in the so-called “Synopsis”
document (*). The authors recommend that work on the Synopsis should be continued so
as to be developed into a comprehensive European Data Base of Good Practices in EDC.

(*) See “Learning for democratic citizenship: Synopsis of approaches, methods and good
practices” by Sabine Manzel and Markus Dreher, doc. DGIV/EDU/CIT (2000) 28.
 8

PART 1
LEARNING FOR DEMOCRACRATIC CITIZENSHIP
IN CONTEXT
1.1. Background
1.1.1 Learning for Democratic Citizenship: An instrument for
developing a culture of rights and responsibilities

In the "Final Declaration", passed at the Second Summit of the Heads of State and
Government of the member states of the Council of Europe in October 1997, the assembly
expressed their view that "the far-reaching changes in Europe and the great challenges to our
societies require intensified co-operation between all European democracies". The Summit
went on to say:
(...) "Aware of the educational and cultural dimension of the main challenges to be
faced by Europe in the future as well as of the essential role of culture and education
in strengthening mutual understanding and confidence between our peoples: - (we)
express our desire to develop education for democratic citizenship based on the rights
and responsibilities of citizens, and the participation of young people in civil society."
(...)1
The aim to strengthen democratic stability in the member states was the main focus of the
Action Plan attached to the "Final Declaration". In Chapter IV of the Action Plan, the Summit
stated:
"Education for democratic citizenship: the Heads of State and Government have
decided to launch an initiative for education for democratic citizenship in order to
promote citizens' awareness of their rights and responsibilities in a democratic
society, activating existing networks, ..."2

The emphasis on "citizens'rights and responsibilities" and on the need for "active citizens'
(and in particular those of young people) “participation" within a "civil society" reflects the
increasing concern among politicians and other public figures, scientists and educators about
the state of democratic culture in Europe. Other focal points of the Declaration and Action
Plan pointed to the need to stimulate "respect for human rights and the rule of law", the view
"to building a freer, more tolerant and just European society based on common values", and,
in general, "cohesion, stability and security in Europe".
As a result of the Summit' s Declaration, the Council of Europe, being the largest and oldest
intergovernmental organisation in Europe, established a major programme "Education for
Democratic Citizenship" (EDC).

1
Council of Europe, Final Declaration of the Heads of State and Government of the member states of the
Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France, October 11, 1997, p.1. The Declaration and Action Plan can be found on
the internet: http://www.coe.fr.
2
Ibid., p. 5 ff.
 9

Background
In 1997 the Education for Democratic Citizenship (EDC) project was set up with the aim of
finding out which values and skills individuals require in order to become participating
citizens, how they can acquire these skills and how they can learn to pass them on to others.
In 1998 the project received further political support at the 2nd Summit (October 1997 in
Strasbourg) of the Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe. They agreed, as
a part of their Action Plan, to raise citizens’ awareness of their rights and responsibilities in a
democratic society, to activate existing networks and to encourage and facilitate the
participation of young people in civil society.

Empowering citizens in a rapidly changing world

In today’s increasingly complex and diverse world, it has become necessary to redefine the
meaning of participatory democracy and to reassess the status of the citizen. Extremist
movements, violence, racism, xenophobia and social exclusion threaten democracies.
Globalisation and far-reaching technological development challenge them. Each individual
has a vital role to play in achieving democratic stability and peace in society. The Education
for Democratic Citizenship project seeks to find out how individuals can be inspired to take
up this challenge and how they can be empowered to play this responsible role in the context
of the rapidly evolving political structures of modern democratic citizenship.

A many-sided approach
Democratic citizenship is more than a matter of established legal and formal rights and
responsibilities. It also covers a wide range of possible relationships between individuals,
groups, associations, organisations and communities. Education for democratic citizenship
can take place in schools, but also outside, in any place where people get together, at any time
during people’s lives - it is based on the idea of life-long learning. Thus the EDC project is
many-sided in its concepts and activities and touches political, legal, social and cultural areas
of democratic societies.

Target groups
The project addresses a great variety of people and concerns all age groups and all social
classes. It focuses particularly on politicians, decision-makers, teachers, parents of pupils,
media experts, company representatives, trade unions, NGOs, communities, cultural and
political institutions. For political leaders it is necessary to facilitate decision-making in
favour of education for democratic citizenship. For practitioners in the field it is important to
support examples of good practice, to study concepts and approaches, to produce educational
material and to develop networks between the different partners.

Objectives
The EDC project aims at heightening public understanding and awareness of the many
different aspects of democratic citizenship, particularly in a context of social change. The
consideration and improvement of institutional structures and processes specific to the
development of education for democratic citizenship (e.g. schools, communities) are central
objectives. Politicians and decision-makers at all levels are encouraged to treat education for
democratic citizenship as a key feature of education policy.
 10

Activities and working methods

A Project Group of specialists from the Council for Cultural Co-operation (CDCC)* and
NGOs active in the field of education for democratic citizenship was set up at the beginning
of the project. The main project activities which are grounded in theory as well as in practical
everyday life, have been divided into three sub-groups:
A – concepts / definitions:
Aims: to work out a framework of concepts for education for democratic citizenship together
with the appropriate terminology and to identify the basic skills required for democratic
practices in European societies.
B – pilot projects / citizenship sites:
Aims: to identify, learn from, compare, appraise and encourage the development of
citizenship sites (innovative and empowering initiatives in which citizens participate actively
in society, especially at local level). Partnerships between the different actors involved in
education for citizenship (e.g. schools, parents, the media, businesses, local authorities, adult
education establishments) are identified and supported.
C – training and support systems:
Aims: to identify different methods and means of learning, teaching and training; to build up
a network of multipliers, adult educators, teacher trainers in education for democracy; to
exchange information and experience in the field of EDC and to create forums for reflection
and discussion.

The working methods include conferences, seminars, training activities, study visits,
exchanges, comparative studies, dissemination activities (a collection of examples of good
practice, inventory of Council of Europe activities, Internet site, production of teaching
material) and the development of interactive processes between projects, institutions and
information sources.

* the CDCC manages the Council’s programmes on education and culture in 47 countries.

A network of partners
The project brings together a large number of partners in a network – member States, site
participants, NGOs, businesses, the European Union, UNESCO and different sectors of the
Council of Europe (those concerned with legal, political, cultural, youth, and local and
regional government questions). It is also linked to co-operation and assistance programmes
in human rights and democratic citizenship education.

Since the Final Declaration and the Action Plan seek to reinforce the awareness of "citizens'
rights and responsibilities" as well as "active participation", the question arises of how to
define the terms "rights", "responsibilities" and "active participation" and in particular the
relationship between these terms.

1.1.1.1. The relationship between rights and responsibilities

In descriptions and discussions on the rights and freedoms that may be enjoyed by the
individual, mention is hardly ever made of the duties or responsibilities of the individual
towards the community or the state. Indeed, the relationship between rights and
responsibilities has, so far, not been subjected to theoretical reflection to the same extent as
other related issues. As Péter Kovács observed, the State is the only agency expected and
required to assume some form of responsibility for the individual as well as common public
 11

wellbeing. The State is expected to bear responsibility for protecting, teaching and
implementing human rights.3 Regarding the individual' s responsibility, Kovács refers to the
new (draft) of the United Nations "Declaration on the rights and responsibilities of
individuals, groups and organs of society to promote and protect universally recognised
human rights and fundamental freedoms", but believes that the term "responsibility" as
included in the title of the UN-Declaration is misleading, since the text contains no more than
some form of a relatively vague "responsible attitude". In general, it can be said that some
rights do not necessarily go hand in hand with responsibility; in other cases, responsibility is
limited or may be directed at an ultimate aim, or may be inherent in certain ethical
considerations. Kovács does not believe that drawing up a list of responsibilities would be
possible or advisable.4

In the American tradition of democratic thought, the term "civic virtue" is frequently used in a
way that comes close to the term "civic responsibility". Clarie L. Gaudiani states:

"Democratic nations make different demands on citizens and subcultures. Laws

protect individuals against incursions by the government, groups, or other individuals’
personal freedom: to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. As the founders of this
country [i.e. the United States of America, K.D.] understood, pluralistic democracies
must assume civic virtues in designing and maintaining a form of government that
respect each person' s self-interest and still promote and secure the common good.
Now we have lost sight of civic virtues: both in, how to value them and how to teach
and practice them. We need to rediscover, as participants in a pluralistic democracy,
the civic virtues necessary for personal liberty in a global community... The task
begins with exploring, identifying, and then practising and teaching these virtues in
the context of citizenship..."5

The ideal of "active citizenship" is also highlighted by Article A of the Amsterdam Treaty of
the European Union. One of the main objectives of Directorate General for Education and
Culture of the European Commission is to develop citizenship not just in the legal sense of
the word but also through encouraging people' s practical involvement in democratic process
at all levels: "Action in the field of education, training and youth offers a privileged vehicle
for the promotion of active participation in Europe' s rich diversity of cultures, economies..."6
However, educators and politicians would probably agree that "the level of awareness among
European citizens of their rights and responsibilities in a democratic society is far from
satisfactory"7 and that education should, accordingly, have the task "of preparing the
individual for life in a democratic society by enabling him to carry out his duties and
responsibilities as a citizen, introducing him to politics, and teaching him the fundamental

3
Ibid., p. 15.
4
Ibid., p. 16.
5
Claire L. Gaudiani, "In Pursuit of Global Civic Virtues", Liberal Education, Vol. 77, No. 3, 1991, p. 14; quoted
in: Democracy is a Discussion, Handbook, Connecticut College, New London, Connecticut, U.S.A., p. 30 f.
6
The European Commission, Directorate General for Education and Culture, Homepage,
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg22/citizen.
7
Kovács, p. 16, quoting Mr. Martelli, rapporteur to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Doc.
8263, 17 December 1998.
 12

principles and values at the root of our society, such as respect for human rights and
democracy, as well as tolerance and solidarity that result from a greater understanding and
knowledge of others".8

1.1.1.2. Rights and responsibilities as an educational task

Theoretically, reservations regarding the formulation of a "list of responsibilities" might be
justified. From an educational viewpoint, however, such theoretical restrictions appear
unsatisfactory, because a functioning democracy requires informed, responsible, participative
and critical citizens – i.e. citizens that are aware that life in a community entails not only
rights but also certain duties. The central task of all pedagogical and andragogical activity is,
therefore, to empower the present and future citizen for his or her active participation in and
contribution to the community, in the shaping of its affairs and in solving its problems.
Democracy is not only a form of governance and a political system based on the rather limited
role of citizens as "voters" providing majorities for those who exercise control. Beyond this
formal aspect, democracy must be seen as a form of living together in a community which
becomes valuable only if active use is made of certain political liberal freedoms, if those
freedoms are enjoyed symmetrically by all citizens and if they all contribute to their further
development. In the long term, democracy can only be sustained if it is able to adapt to
changing circumstances.
Democracy can be stable only if its tasks and functions are carried out by efficient democratic
institutions. The legitimacy of democratic processes depends on the quality of the results
obtained – unsuccessful policies will, at least in the mid or longer term, lead to
destabilisation. Therefore, the efficiency of institutions is of prime importance and rests, in
turn, on their acceptance by the general public to the extent that institutions such as political
parties, interest groups and civil movements rely on voluntary work and active contributions
from citizens or members. Citizens’ readiness to participate, voluntarism and community-
mindedness are directly connected with democratic stability.
Participation, therefore, is a crucial element in democratic stability and should not be seen as
limited to the voting process. Participation of citizens in public decision-making processes is
one of the basic rights, but it is also a duty. In fact, the democratic ideal invariably relies on
the acceptance of participative responsibility. In modern democracies, the danger that
participative rights could be abolished or violated by the state, is far smaller than the danger
that the idea of participation as a duty will not be taken seriously by the citizens.

8
Ibid.
 13

Education for Democracy focuses, in particular, on creating responsible and informed

citizens.
It has three objectives:
• EDC aims at providing the citizen with the knowledge, skills and competencies needed for
active participation in a democratic civil society.
• EDC aims at creating opportunities for; dialogue and discourse, conflict resolution and
consensus, communication and interaction.
• EDC aims at stimulating an awareness of; rights and responsibilities, norms of behaviour
and values, ethical and moral issues within the community.

To achieve these aims, the EDC process has three dimensions:

• a cognitive dimension (acquiring ideas, concepts, systems)
• a social dimension (the ability to practice democracy in various forms and in all areas and
phases of life – in childhood, adolescence and adult life; in school, vocational training and
higher education, at the work-place and in voluntary associations)
• an affective dimension (recognition and internalisation of values)

To sum up: Education has an important role to play in the "training" of citizens for active and
responsible citizenship in a democracy. Therefore, education should provide orientation for
present and future citizens with regard to rights as well as responsibilities.

Practising educators must, in turn, be prepared to discuss the importance and character of
duties and responsibilities with their target groups, in particular with young people. There are
several duties or responsibilities essential for a functioning democracy, for example:
• the duty to participate
• the duty to inform oneself
• the duty to exercise tolerance towards other cultures
• the duty to exercise tolerance towards other opinions.
Education for democracy (learning about, for, and in democracy as a "culture of rights and
responsibilities") can take place in various active or passive forms:
• in a more or less receptive or even passive manner (reading newspapers and reports,
watching political issues on TV etc.)
• in the learning experience within the general process of political socialisation
• in everyday exchanges of ideas and opinions (discussing politics, joining debate clubs)
• in active voting during elections at all levels of the political system
• in learning by doing (party work, voluntary work in political parties).

Understanding democracy as a "culture of rights and responsibilities" also entails

consideration of the groups involved. Generally speaking, we perceive "the citizen" as a
normal, everyday young, middle-aged or elderly person – living in a family, going to school
or university, working in full-time employment, or in retirement. However, the "right to
participate" in all issues concerning the general public involves all citizens – including
prisoners, mentally handicapped people, unemployed people, even though little consideration
is given to their information needs and training in exercising their rights.
 14

Educating citizens for active citizenship in a democratic society places lifelong learning at the
very centre of an integrated approach. Considering the rapid changes taking place in virtually
all spheres of life, a democracy must be able to offer its citizens sufficient opportunities to
access and acquire required knowledge – not only in their childhood, but throughout their
lives.

With these aspects (i.e. the aims and dimensions of EDC as well as the issues of rights and
responsibilities) in mind, it is possible to formulate if not a definition, then at least a general
description of what is meant by “Education for Democratic Citizenship”:

EDC is a set of multifaceted practices and activities developed as a bottom-up approach to

help pupils, young people and adults participate actively and responsibly in the decision-
making processes in their communities for the purpose of promoting and strengthening
democratic culture based on awareness and commitment to shared fundamental values, such
as human rights and freedoms, equality of difference and the rule of law, for their own benefit
and for the benefit of society as a whole. It focuses on providing life-long opportunities for
acquiring, applying and disseminating information, values and skills linked to democratic
principles and procedures in a broad range of formal and non-formal teaching and learning
environments.

1.1.1.3. The changing environment of EDC

In a world characterised by rapid technological and social change, the nature of all learning
processes is also changing rapidly. As we witness the emergence of a "knowledge or
information society", knowledge becomes a productive factor; the transfer of knowledge takes
place via media rather than through interpersonal communication, and the acquisition of
knowledge is a lifelong process. At the same time, knowledge is global in character; space
and time, the old determinants and boundaries of all learning processes are dissolving and
learning potentially takes place anywhere and anytime. The challenge of lifelong learning is
therefore closely connected to the question of integrating the new media into the learning
process.
All learning involved in "the culture of rights and responsibilities" and aimed at strengthening
democracy is faced with institutionalised learning and knowledge acquisition processes i.e. in
schools, at universities, in adult education and evening classes etc. It will increasingly be
supplemented by new forms of learning - just-in-time learning, learning-on-the-job, media-
and computer-supported learning. These forms, in turn, require new communicative and co-
operative skills and competencies in the media for accessing such knowledge.
Against this background of general change in approach to education, the EDC learning
environment is changing dramatically, while at the same time the complexity of the
knowledge required for "informed and responsible citizenship" is increasing. Predominantly
"institutionalised learning" e.g. as in schools, is being replaced by newer forms of learning:
• "individualised learning" creates an opportunity for self-directed learning, unrestricted by
limitations of time and location.
• "co-operative learning" can have two forms:
– direct social interaction supplemented by use of computers;
– network-supported co-operative approaches, like "virtual class-rooms", "school
online networks" etc.
 15

The relevance of such developments for EDC can be summed up as follows:

• The more traditional EDC methodology and didactics will lose predominance.
• Against a background of global learning opportunities, the limitations of time and location
will virtually disappear.
• Project- and problem-oriented approaches will gain in importance, bringing new
methodological forms and EDC didactics.
• The ambivalent issue of "authenticity", too, will gain importance in the democracy
learning process, "authenticity" will be increasingly difficult to define where global media
is present.
• Educational methods like simulation games, role plays, case studies, active online research
studies etc. will gain in importance, because the new communication media are
particularly suited to such tasks.

1.1.2 Learning for democratic citizenship in Europe – the current

situation

Learning for democratic citizenship is deeply rooted in the idea of post-WW2 Europe as an
integrated and yet culturally diverse area of democratic stability. It confirms the principles of
European standard-setting instruments and the decisions adopted by the Parliamentary
Assembly and the Committee of Ministers.9 The need for strengthening democratic values
among the youth through education in preparation for democratic citizenship was the focal
point in the Final Declaration and Plan of Action of the Second European Summit in 1997.

9
Besides the European conventions, among numerous documents that mark the history of the idea of EDC, are:
a) of the Committee of Ministers: Resolution No (64)11 on Civil Rights and European Education, of 6 October
1964; Declaration regarding Intolerance - a Threat to Democracy, of 14 May 1981; Recommendation No R(84)9
on Second-Generation Migrants, of 20 March 1984; Recommendation No R(84)18 on the Training of Teachers
in Education for Intercultural Understanding, notably in a Context of Migration, of 25 September 1984;
Recommendation No R(85)7 on Teaching and Learning about Human Rights in Schools, of 14 May 1985;
Recommendation No R(90)7 Concerning Information and Counseling for Young People in Europe, of 21
February 1990; Recommendation No R(92)12 on Community Relations, of 21 September 1992;
Recommendation No R(94) on Youth Mobility, of 12. October 1995; Recommendation No R(97)3 on Youth
Participation and the Future of Civil Society, of 4 February 1997; Recommendation No R(97)20 on "Hate
Speech", of 30 October 1997; Recommendation No R(97)21 on the Media and the Promotion of a Culture of
Tolerance, of 30 October 1998; Recommendation No R(98)8 on Children' s Participation in Family and Social
Life, of 18 September 1998; The Budapest Declaration of the Committee of Ministers "For a Greater Europe
Without Dividing Lines", of 7 May 1999; Declaration and Programme on Education for Democratic Citizenship,
Based on the Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens of the Committee of Ministers, of 7 May 1999;
Recommendation No R(99)1 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on Measures to Promote Media
Pluralism, of 19 January 1999; Recommendation No R(2000)4 on the Education of Roma/Gypsy Children in
Europe, of 3 February 2000; b) of the Consultative/Parliamentary Assembly: Recommendation No 453 on
Measures to be Taken Against Incitement to Racial, National and Religious Hatred of 1966; Resolution No 743
on the Need to Combat Resurgent Fascist Propaganda and its Racist Aspects of 1980; Recommendation No 968
on Xenophobic Attitudes and Movements in Member Countries with Regard to Migrant Workers, of 1983;
Recommendation 1034 on the Improvement in Europe of Mutual Understanding between Ethnic Communities
"Daring to Live Together", of 1986; Recommendation No 1116 on AIDS and Human Rights, of 29. November
1989; Recommendation on Religious Tolerance in a Democratic Society, of 1993; Recommendation No 1346 on
Human Right Education, 26 September 1997; as well as c) the Vienna Declaration of the Heads of State and
Government of the Member States of the Council of Europe of 9. October 1993; and the Final Declaration of the
Second Summit of the Council of Europe, of 11 October 1997.
 16

Growing recognition of the importance of education in promoting human rights, democracy

and social cohesion throughout the continent led the Committee of Ministers, in May 1999, to
adopt the Declaration and Programme on Education for Democratic Citizenship Based on
the Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens. The Declaration describes EDC as an integrated
activity which:

• constitutes a life-long learning experience of participation in various contexts;

• equips men and women for active and responsible roles in life and in society;
• aims at developing a culture of human rights;
• prepares people to live in a multicultural society;
• strengthens social cohesion, mutual understanding and solidarity;
• promotes inclusive strategies for all age groups and sectors of society.

By proclaiming commitment to democracy through the acquisition and practice of rights and
responsibilities as one of the pillars of European education, and by linking education to the
concept of lifelong learning, the Declaration is a departure from the narrow understanding of
knowledge transmission through formal education institutions to a wider concept of
competence construction, acquisition and exchange of knowledge through a practically
unlimited number of educational media and resources nurtured by a “learning” society.
Furthermore, it clearly shows that the use of resources to this end depends on their correct
management and, thus, calls upon member countries to make EDC an essential component of
their educational, training, culture and youth policies and practices.

An understanding of learning democratic citizenship as a lifelong perspective casts fresh light

on the basics of education. It calls for an approach based on the notion of reciprocal,
horizontal or shared responsibility of the individual, society, and the state for learning the
rights and responsibilities of democracy.

The approach has been developed over the last three decades by different bodies (UNESCO,
the Club of Rome, OECD, EU). A graphic interpretation of this approach, based on the latest
EURYDICE survey on lifelong learning, is presented in Picture 1. Here, the responsibility of
both the individual and society for lifelong learning is linked to a set of quality provisions
(formal, non-formal and informal) dependent on the explicit levels of knowledge and skills
needed by all citizens. The framework represents an "agreement" between the individual and
society and has a binding force for both sides. The emphasis is on both the individual’s
motivation and awareness of his or her needs and also on the role of society in guaranteeing
the fulfilment of individual goals for the benefit of all.
 17

Picture 1: The share of responsibility in promoting learning for democratic citizenship

LEARNING FOR DEMOCRATIC CITIZENSHIP*

individual responsibility for society'

s responsibility for the
educational development establishment of learning
(AUTONOMOUS CHOICE provisions
&COMMITMENT) (POLICIES AND MULTIPLE
RESOURCES)

• development of standards of knowledge and skills needed by all citizens

• ensuring provisions (institutions, management and funding)

FORMAL EDUCATION
(education and training systems)
NON-FORMAL EDUCATION
(organised bodies in society)
INFORMAL EDUCATION
(activities devised by individuals themselves)

* Summarised according to: Lifelong learning : the contribution of education systems in the Member States of
the European Union. Results of the EURYDICE Survey. Working Document prepared by the EURYDICE
European Unit for the Ministerial Conference to launch the three programmes Socrates II, Leonardo da Vinci II
and Youth, Lisbon, 17-18 March 2000 (pre-print version).

By putting individual responsibility at the heart of the process of lifelong knowledge and
skills acquisition, some authors prefer to use the term "lifelong learning" instead of "lifelong
education", which they define in the context of governmental policies and institutional
activities. Others continue to use the term "lifelong education", pointing out that in modern
societies education has become so varied, complex and dynamic, that it manages to meet
individual needs for learning throughout one’s life.

European societies differ in the number and complexity of educational provisions for the
learning for democratic citizenship process, as well as in the relationships between
educational results and social recognition. In societies, such as those in transition, with low
levels of educational choice where there is little connection between education and social
recognition, stress solely on individual responsibility might be misleading. In a restricted
situation, where there is a lack of opportunity for autonomous choice, an individual becomes
"less" self-responsible for learning. That is why the reciprocity of responsibility of both the
individual and society is central in the above framework of lifelong learning for democratic
citizenship (Picture 1) and why, the notion of learning, as an autonomous individual action, is
so tightly connected with the notion of societies'provisions for education.
 18

Learning for democratic citizenship has become the common denominator in a number of
formal, non-formal and informal European educational and training initiatives that have
appeared in the last few decades promoting equitable and just society, open to and shaped by
all its members. As such, it is the framework reference for new initiatives that are likely to
occur in the course of European integration.

A review of several surveys and studies undertaken by national and international institutions10
on the preparation of students, young people and adults for their roles as citizens and
examples of existing practices are presented in the Synopsis11. The results of the review of
citizenship sites initiated by the Project on EDC12, help define the current situation of
learning for democratic citizenship in Europe through seven broad and inter-related
dimensions. Unfortunately, due to the lack of time and literature available on programmes
and activities performed at the grass-roots level, our analysis will mostly deal with formal
settings.

10
The resource materials for analysis include:
- Birzea, C., Education for Democratic Citizenship: Contribution of the Council of Europe: In-service Training
Programme for Education Staff during 1998. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1999, document
DECS/EDU/INSET/SEM (99) 1.
- Project "Education for Democratic Citizenship": Examples of Good Practice in Member States, Strasbourg:
Council of Europe, 1999, document DECS/CIT (98) 20 bil. rev. 3.
- World Survey of Civic Education, Strasbourg: CIVITAS International, 1999.
- Mawhinney, A., A Preliminary Survey of Human Rights Education and Training in the Member States of the
Council of Europe and States with Special Guest Status. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, January 1999,
document H (99) 6 /prov.
- Examples of Good Practice: Projects in Education, Training and Youth Supported by the European
Commission. European Commission
- Osler, A., The Contribution of Community Action Programmes in the Fields of Education, Training and Youth
to the Development of Citizenship with a European Dimension: Final Synthesis Report. Birmingham: The
University of Birmingham, August 1997.
- Torney-Purta, J.; J.Schwille and J.-A. Amadeo, Civic Education Across Countries: Twenty four National case
Studies from the IEA Civic Education Project. Amsterdam: International Association for Evaluation of
Educational Achievement, 1999
- Kerr, D. Citizenship Education: An International Comparison. London: Qualifications and Curriculum
Authority, 1999.
11
Data collection of material related to this present Study (prepared by: S. Manzel and M. Dreher), April 2000
12
Citizenship and Learning: A Draft Synthesis Report on Sites of Citizenship (prepared by K.Forrester and L.
Carey), October 1999, DECS/EDU/CIT (99) 62;
 19

A) Types of programmes and activities

In the context of compulsory education:

• Civic education programmes. They are mostly focused on political and civil rights and
freedoms with the aim of preparing students for their role as future citizens.
Programmes may be implemented as compulsory or optional school subjects, or as
part of existing curricula and/or as extra-curricular or cross-curricular activities,
mostly in upper primary and secondary classes. They appear under different titles,
such as: “civic education", “civics”, “understanding society”, “man and society”,
“political education”, etc.

• Human rights education programmes. Their focus is on developing students'

awareness of universal human rights and freedoms and on preparing them to promote
and protect these rights through the provisions laid down in a democratic community.
In most cases, these programmes are partially integrated into civic education classes.
After the adoption of the Plan of Action for the UN Decade for Human Rights
Education (1995-2004) and the 50th anniversary of the UDHR, there is a tendency to
give human rights issues more place in education, either as a separate or a cross-
curricula school subject.

• Programmes in intercultural, anti-racist, peace, tolerance and global education. They

aim to promote understanding of and respect for cultural diversity more or less
explicitly based on the principles of equality, the rule of law, pluralism, solidarity,
peace, interconnectedness and inter-dependence. Particular attention is given to the
development of skills and competencies in peaceful conflict-resolution, co-operation,
negotiation and mediation. The programmes are rarely introduced as separate subjects.
They usually appear as "emergency measures" added to the existing curricula, such as
civics. The rise of violence in societies and schools, as well as the impact of
globalisation on national education systems, has created a greater need for the
implementation of these programmes in cross-curricular or extra-curricular activities,
integrated teaching, etc.

If the programmes are based on active and participatory methods of teaching and
learning, they usually have an impact on school life and that consequently leads to new
opportunities for acquiring knowledge and skills for practising democracy. With changes
in the organisation and management of educational institutions, i.e. greater autonomy of
schools, involvement of students in decision-making processes, partnerships with parents
and the wider community, schools have become democratic micro-communities of
students, teachers, school administrations, parents, local administrations, and other
citizens. The place for learning democratic citizenship is no longer restricted to the
formal provision of class instruction but encompasses multidimensional and various
opportunities for students to engage in the enrichment of civil life from an early age.

In the context of post-compulsory education and training, including vocational training in

colleges and universities, learning for democratic citizenship occurs in a number of pre-
service and in-service training programmes and activities. Among the professionals
mostly targeted throughout Europe are teachers in primary and secondary education, less
often in higher education. Recently, new programmes for training various professional
 20

groups in human rights, peaceful conflict-resolution techniques, including group

mediation and facilitation, have appeared more frequently. Courses, seminars, workshops,
conferences, round-tables, action-research projects and other forms of training are
organised for lawyers, social workers, professionals working with prisoners, medical staff,
managers, police and army officers, as well as for the university students13 These
professionals "operate with" individuals and their knowledge and skills in promoting
human rights standards and procedures, including the rule of law, equality and pluralism,
are indispensable in empowering citizens and in strengthening democracy and civil
society.

In the context of grass-roots activities, learning for democratic citizenship is prevalent in

a rapidly growing number of citizens’ programmes, activities and initiatives that challenge
traditional understanding of citizenship and democracy. They are redefining the
relationships between, both, the individual and society and, the state and the market, by
empowering citizens and by preparing the main actors in society for mediation between
individuals and the government. Most of the activities are initiated and carried out by non-
governmental organisations, community and neighbourhood associations, youth groups,
etc. The forms of learning differ: from spontaneous debates and community projects to
seminars and workshops. The initiatives that focus on promoting youth participation in
society and their co-operation with adults, as a means of enhancing "living democracy", as
well as those that empower young people for partnership with governmental structures in
decision-making processes, are the best examples of learning for democratic citizenship.14

All these formal, non-formal and informal activities in education for democratic citizenship
provide a wide array of opportunities for students, young people and adults to learn about
their rights and responsibilities as citizens but also to learn how to protect these rights and
fulfil their responsibilities throughout life. By engaging in these activities, citizens actually
foster their own self-empowerment and go on to create the conditions for a "living
democracy". Modern communication technologies, in particular the access to Internet, data
banks and information centres, have become most important in this process.

13
See, for example: - Andreopoulos, G.J. and Claude, R.P (eds.) Human Rights Education for the Twenty-First
Century. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997; - Human Rights and Police: Seminar
Proceedings, Strasbourg 6-8 December 1995. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1997; - European Educational Co-
operation for pace, Stability and Democracy in south-east Europe: Activities of the Council of Europe,
Strasbourg: Council of Europe, October 1998; - Birzea, C., Education for Democratic Citizenship: Contribution
of the Council of Europe: In-service Training Programme for Education Staff during 1998. Strasbourg: Council
of Europe, 1999, document DECS/EDU/INSET/SEM (99) 1.
14
Kovacheva, S. Keys to Youth Participation in Eastern Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1999,
document CDEJ (99) 9; - Boukobza, E. Keys to Participation: A Practitioners'Guide. Strasbourg: Council of
Europe, 1998, document PART-GT (96) 6 revised; - Project "Education for Democratic Citizenship": Examples
of Good Practice in Member States, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1999, document DECS/CIT (98) 20 bil. rev.
3.; - Osler, A., The Contribution of Community Action Programmes in the Fields of Education, Training and
Youth to the Development of Citizenship with a European Dimension: Final Synthesis Report. Birmingham: The
University of Birmingham, August 1997.; - Examples of Good Practice: Projects in Education, Training and
Youth Supported by the European Commission. European Commission
 21

The complexity of the current European situation that promotes learning for democratic
citizenship is well expressed in the report on the Warsaw Conference on Education for
Democratic Citizenship held in December 1999:

"Education for democratic citizenship today involves a threefold lifelong learning strategy: the initial
education of children, the provision of adult learning opportunities and the enrichment of daily learning
environments. It is both a formal and a non-formal process, involving many ministries (education,
employment, culture, health, etc.) and many educational agencies: schools, non-governmental organisations,
universities, adult education centres, the media, etc. Education for democratic citizenship includes many
themes: civic education, political literacy, peace education, environmental education, human rights
education, and community education. Education for democratic citizenship corresponds, among these, to a
set of core values, competencies and methods related to learning for participation, empowerment, rights and
15
responsibilities in a democratic society."

B) Strategies for the development of programmes and teaching/learning materials

Equally varied are methods for the development of programmes and teaching/learning
materials in this field:
• Methods for the development of programmes and materials in formal education depend
on the level of centralisation in the educational system, the transparency in the processes
of decision-making and the status of education for democratic citizenship related issues in
local and national educational policies. In the case of civic education programmes, which
are most often represented in European educational systems, the methods include:

a) In decentralised countries; educational authorities set up core frameworks or

recommendations for the development of curricula and teaching/learning materials,
leaving schools to create their own programmes and choose resources according to
their needs. Schools are usually provided with multiple teaching/learning materials,
including films, videos, Internet and other non-classical communication tools. Such
methods are result-based with the focus on creating a student-friendly educational
environment.

b) In centralised countries; central educational authorities are in charge of developing

curriculum and instructional materials. They also define aims, objectives, content and
methods of instruction as well as the criteria for evaluation. Schools are allowed to
modify up to 20-30 percent of the curriculum. In some cases they can freely use
additional materials in class. Such approaches are frequently content-oriented and
education-based.

In the latter case, when educational authorities seek external assistance for developing
curricula and teaching/learning materials, four methods appear:
i) external assistance (from universities, individual experts, non-governmental
organisations, teachers’ associations, trade unions, and, rarely, from students,
youth groups or parents) is sought for reviewing draft versions of curricula and
materials developed by the ministries or by institutes and individual experts
linked to the ministries;
15
Belanger, P. Conference on Education for Democratic Citizenship: Methods, Practices and Strategies:
Warsaw, 4-8 December, 1999: Final Report, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2000, document DECS/EDU/CIT
(2000) 4, p. 11.
 22

ii) educational authorities work closely with one or more of these groups, both on
national and international level, throughout the process of curriculum and
material development and implementation;
iii) educational authorities adapt programmes and materials previously developed
and used by local non-governmental organisations, professional associations,
individual experts etc.;
iv) educational authorities have foreign programmes and materials (usually from
intergovernmental and international non-governmental organisations) translated
and implemented in schools with or without adaptation of the original text. This is
particularly true in some transitional countries that find themselves under internal
and external pressure to acquire democratic standards. Faced with the need to
ensure rapid changes but with no tradition in developing programmes or materials
for learning democratic citizenship as well as having scarce domestic market
resources, educational authorities use such a method in the initial phase of
development.

• Methods for the development of non-formal and informal programmes, activities and
materials are less transparent, probably due to the fact that such analysis is yet to be done
by non-governmental organisations or by research institutions. In some cases non-formal
and non-governmental institutions, organisations and associations engage external experts
either to "do the job for them" or to assist them in producing programmes and learning
materials that they later use in workshops and seminars. Others rely on their own
experiences combining top-down and bottom-up strategies. Still others develop learning
materials based on experience and contributions from their trainees. This bottom-up
approach is deeply connected to the notion of reciprocity of learning and teaching for
democratic citizenship. It gives both the trainers and the trainees good feedback on the
quality of the work done.

The fact that many formal programmes still arrive in schools "from above" and that teachers
and students are often considered to be receivers of "the lectures on democracy", makes the
position of the school inferior when compared to the multitude of initiatives at grass-root
level. Since the success in learning for democratic citizenship depends on a joint venture
between educational authorities, students, teachers, parents and other actors in the
community, all of whom are indispensable in making education for democratic citizenship a
lifelong learning process, it is necessary for them to establish multi-lateral and bi-lateral
partnerships throughout the development and implementation of programmes and materials.
Such co-operation usually succeeds in breaking down the traditional boundaries between
formal, non-formal and informal educational provisions in the process of teaching and
lifelong learning.

As yet, there is no widely recognised strategy for monitoring, assessing and evaluating
programmes, materials, teachers' practice and students' achievement in learning for
democratic citizenship. This is a critical issue that needs immediate action. National reporting
on educational systems only includes information on students'achievement in civics if the
subject has compulsory status and only in reference to knowledge acquisition. No information
is available on the evaluation of programmes, the quality of teachers'work, the atmosphere in
the classroom and/or school nor on other aspects of school life that might be used as a
 23

measure of success or failure of existing the methods for the development and
implementation of programmes and teaching/learning materials in democratic citizenship.

C) Preparation of teachers/trainers

While very little information is available on the preparation of non-formal trainers in this
field, the recruitment of teachers is reflected in a wide range of models used for selection.
Civic education and, in some cases, human rights education, is taught by:
• teachers of history, social studies, geography and, sometimes, by teachers of philosophy;
• teachers who are interested in the subject, irrespective of their academic background;
• teachers who have not completed the required teaching load (i.e. a number of required
hours of teaching per month);

Training teachers in civic education is seldom obligatory, although it may be recommended.

Throughout Europe, teachers lack continuous and systematic preparation for their work both
in pre-service and in in-service programmes. There are only a few countries where teachers of
civics are required to pass specialised pre-service or in-service courses carried out by
universities or teacher training institutions. In some cases no training is provided for teachers.

Three types of teacher preparation models exist:

• in-service courses, seminars, workshops and conferences mostly organised independently
by local and international non-governmental or intergovernmental organisations, or in co-
operation with pedagogical institutes or teacher training centres, professional associations,
and ministries (the most frequent form);
• regular pre-service and in-service programmes carried out by colleges, universities and
teacher training centres (less often)
• post-graduate and post-doctoral programmes in civic education (rarely).

D) Main obstacles

Some of the most serious obstacles in the development of learning for democratic citizenship
found in this study, are:

• insufficient gains in theoretical and practical knowledge concerning teaching/learning

democratic citizenship based on systematic monitoring and research; underdeveloped
strategies and unequal dissemination of theoretical and practical innovations and research
results;
• lack of trained teachers/mediators, teacher trainers and administrators for school and out-
of school programmes and activities that relate to the acquisition of new forms of
knowledge and new skills necessary for quality teaching and learning for democratic
citizenship;
• insufficient financial assistance for the development and implementation of innovative
programmes and resource materials for teaching and learning in the changing democratic
environment;
• lack of co-operation and partnerships between policy-makers, programme-designers,
teachers, professional associations, grass-roots activists and financial institutions;
• "by the book" teaching of democratic citizenship as a separate school subject that aims to
develop descriptive knowledge and cognitive skills;
 24

• lack of continuity and sustainability in programmes and activities that are performed at
grass-root level.

1.1.3 Changes in the learning environment of democratic citizenship

1.1.3.1. Aspects of change in the educational context

In the last decades, the national and international dimensions of education have undergone
rapid and multiple changes that have resulted in changes in purpose, contents and methods of
teaching and learning.

A) Changes in the way we live

Changes include:
• Greater mobility, including significant waves of migration from the less developed to the
more developed countries caused by politics (severe oppression), economy
(underdevelopment and poverty), insufficient security (violence, inter-ethnic conflicts,
wars). The process is aggravated firstly, by the rise in the brain-drain i.e. the migration of
highly educated professionals and managers who seek better working and living
conditions for themselves and their families and secondly, by the free flow of the labour
force as a result of European integration. These developments have two opposite effects:
a) bringing people from different cultures closer together results in a vibrant
exchange of cultural traditions, knowledge and practices which benefit
European societies;
b) these developments are causing cultural problems, social tension,
fragmentation, instability and insecurity, often rationalised and justified in
terms of a "blame the victim" reaction.
• Wider and more efficient use of science and technology in everyday life including
sophisticated communication systems, enable people to disseminate and exchange
information, ideas and opinions on a wide scale, bringing people from cities and the
countryside together and overcoming the boundaries of time and space. Again, these
developments have two-sided effects:
a) unlimited opportunities for learning and, thus, for personal growth and change
throughout one' s life;
b) new inequalities related to knowledge gaps, on a global level, coupled with
new forms of anxiety and personal crises related to the difficulties in choosing
quality information, on an individual level.

• Improved personal communication that satisfies personal, professional, collective and

other needs, has resulted in:
a) a redefinition of one' s life-sphere with new aspirations and expectations in
relation to life values that increase an awareness of interdependency and the need
for mutual understanding and responsibility;
b) ambiguities in personal commitments and loyalties resulting from the forces of
global pressure.
 25

• The increasing number of challenges and risks in everyday life force people to
continuously question life values and priorities in relation to the family, interest groups,
work, society etc. They can result either in personal empowerment and solidarity or
alternatively a decline in social cohesiveness.

B) Changes in the way our societies are organised

The way people organise their societies is the best indicator of their political, social, cultural
and economic priorities. Some of the changes in the structure of European societies and in
Europe as a whole that may influence learning for democratic citizenship are:
• Society between the reality of fragmentation and the notion of community. Modern
societies are built on a complex system of citizens'relationships rationally governed
through social roles, institutions and rules. The system develops through the interplay of
private and public interests. Inequalities have led to social instability and fragmentation
with perpetual forms of poverty and exclusion. Adopting the basic idea of community
means the renewal of social relationships based on shared values, inclusion, solidarity and
mutual respect.
• A shift in the notion of democracy: from representative to participative governance. The
understanding of the impact of democracy on social order and development has changed
profoundly in the last decades. Citizens'should participate actively in decision-making
processes and promote and protect minority rights.
• Empowerment of citizens. Decisions about society which were traditionally made by
public authorities and market forces, are being transferred to the civil sector. In local
communities, in particular, emphasis is on grass-root movements, i.e. on direct
participation of citizens organised in community associations, non-governmental
organisations, special interest groups, trade unions, etc.
• Weakening power of the state. The process encompasses:
- undoing the notion of the state: from divine will and the primordial community, to
a politically constructed unity;
- changing the notion of the sovereignty of the state: arbitrary actions by the state are
brought under the control of international human rights laws, making the state serve
not rule over its citizens.
Many disagree with the understanding of these changes in terms of social progress. Some
authors speak of an "an endless series of experiments" affected by our inability to control and
direct social processes in the face of economic internationalisation. Others point out the
phenomena of marginalisation and alienation aggravated by global economic processes that
are above political control and express their doubts about the ability of social institutions to
meet current challenges.16

16
Lamoureux, J. Citizenship and Pluralist Thinking: Reflected Practices at Four Sites in Quebec. Strasbourg:
Council of Europe, 1999, document DECS/EDU/CIT (99) 46, p. 12.
 26

C) Changes in the way we see ourselves and others

Two important changes have shaped the idea of learning for democratic citizenship:
• shifts from modern to post-modern understanding of the individual and society, in
particular:
- the critical evaluation of social Darwinism which, based on a universal scheme of
human development promotes cultural assimilation policies and rejects pluralism,
which it considers a social anomaly;
- the introduction of plural society theories that recognise cultural differences as
being positive;
- the understanding of personal and social identity in terms of autonomy, choice,
situation and change;
• shifts from the doctrine of armed peace and the balance of power, that demand the
induction of mass fear and the creation of an enemy, to the idea of positive peace, that
demands the protection of human rights, equality, democracy, pluralism and justice, as
well as negotiation, mediation and dialogue. The idea of positive peace does not merely
mean the absence of fear, violence and war. It stresses the importance of developing
individual and collective responsibility for peace and non-violence based on the
affirmation of peace-building and peace-keeping capacities of individuals and groups.

D) Changes in the way we think of the future

Thinking about the future determines the way citizens act more than ever before. Long and
short term objectives emerge in the process of change. The rise in future consciousness is
manifested in two ways:
• concern for one’s own condition in the future, and
• concern for the condition of future generations, usually formulated as a responsibility for
the protection of future generations'rights.

This explains why common agendas for addressing the most crucial problems in humanity are
so readily adopted nowadays, including world action plans for child development, protection
of environment, strengthening of human rights and freedoms, enhancing social development,
solving population growth problems and promoting healthy habitats.

E) Changes in the way education is understood

Despite constant criticism, a renewed belief in education as a key instrument in social,

political and cultural development has been emerging recently in the following processes:
• the shift from education in terms of schooling based on the notion of knowledge
transmission through teaching, to education as broader knowledge construction and
acquisition where the role of learning through experience, participation, investigation and
sharing is stressed. The latter takes into account the personal needs and capabilities of
both the learner and the teacher and makes all involved in the educational process
responsible for educational practice and its results;
• the changes in defining the purpose of education - instead of a traditional stress on formal
and compartmentalised knowledge, more attention is focused on a broad range of
functional knowledge and life skills that prepare the individual for rapid and numerous
changes. Referring to future learning needs, the UNESCO Commission on the
 27

Development of Education for the 21st century defines the four pillars of education:
learning to know, learning to do, learning to live with others, and learning to be.17

These changes are reflected in the way educational reforms are nowadays developed and
implemented: Generally speaking, national educational reforms have become more context-
sensitive and holistic. They encompass a broad range of issues: from educational objectives,
contents, methods and strategies of teaching/learning, including assessment, through the
organisation and management of schools, to questions on teaching materials, atmosphere in
school, students'rights and responsibilities, teacher training and the code of ethics. Links are
made with other educational institutions, industry and educational research organisations,
attention is paid to school-community relations, etc.
In addition, the reforms are becoming more and more adapted to a variety of citizens'needs
and to the needs of the international community. They are expressed in bi-lateral or multi-
lateral agreements and regional or international standard-setting documents.

1.1.3.2. East-west: similarities and differences in changing contexts

After the collapse of Communism, expressions such as "Central Europe", "Eastern Europe"
and "Western Europe" ceased to be ideologically laden. When they are mentioned today, the
existence of two European worlds segregated by differences in political regime is not
imagined. Neither do they merely define large geographical areas on the continent. They stand
for a sort of division and subtle segregation that has outlived its original causes but reappears
in the transition from communism to democracy which eastern and some central European
countries are now passing through. The European family is still far from sitting round the
same table, its members are lined up between the two opposing ends.

Bearing this in mind, it is important to define both the similarities and differences between
west and east in the changing context of education, as they might have an important influence
on the development and implementation of democratic citizenship learning programmes.

A) Similarities

Determining both the goals and methods for bringing about change are two issues on which
both the east and west of Europe are united, despite the differences and disparities in terms of
tradition, lifestyles and economic development that exist between them and inside each of the
regions. This unity is manifested in the following ways:
• a focus on the prosperity and well-being of all citizens and societies, understood in terms
of sustainable development that integrates the economic, social and environmental
dimensions of change;
• an acceptance of democracy, human rights, pluralism and the rule of law as target values
in an integrated action framework for social, political, cultural and economic issues;
• a commitment to Europe as a vast area of democratic stability built on the principles of
pluralist and parliamentary democracy, universality of rights and freedoms, protection of

17
Learning: The Treasure Within. Paris: UNESCO, 1998.
 28

minorities, a culture of responsibility and lawfulness, and common cultural heritage

enriched by diversity.

B) Differences

Eastern and western countries are not equal in the process of change. While in the west,
democratic changes are synonymous with improving existing social institutions and
structures, in the east an entirely new social order must be built after neutralising the one from
the past. Such discontinuity produces social uncertainty and makes the implementation of the
European agenda in the east more difficult than in the west. According to the MONE
Report18, there are two types of obstacles in the way of social advancement in the east of
Europe. Some of the problems are inherited from the past. They are so deeply rooted in the
social, political and economic fabric of the countries in transition that they still emerge as
being tightly interwoven with new forms of social life and seriously hinder the mechanisms of
transition. It would seem necessary, therefore, that they be resolved as soon as possible, if
eastern European countries are not to lag behind for too long. They include:
• tradition of primacy of the state and ideology over the individual and society;
• former communist understanding of equality as uniformity;
• long history of a centrally planned economy that suppressed market forces;
• tradition of ensuring peace, security and stability by strong control of social and private
life, including the violation of individual rights and freedoms.

18
Women in Transition: The MONEE Project.. Regional Monitoring Report, No 6, 1999. UNICEF, 1999
CEE/CIS/Baltics.
 29

Picture 2: Stability Pact for South-East Europe

STABILITY PACT FOR SOUTH EAST

EUROPE:
aspects relevant to education for democratic citizenship

MAIN GOALS

foster democratic assist economic promote lasting co-operation

processes and institutions reconstruction and growth and stability

WT1 WT2 WT3

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ECONOMIC REFORM STABILITY AND SECURITY
DEMOCRATISATION
Sustainable development: Reconciliation and good neighbourly
• respect and protect human economic growth and social relations
rights, including minorities cohesion
and the media • confidence building
• strengthen the rule of law • foster economic co- • prevent forced displacement
• strengthen civil society operation in the region • ensure the safe and free return
• preserve the multinational • combat illegal of refugees and displaced
and multiethnic diversity of activities (organised persons to their homes
countries crime, corruption) • promote regional co-operation
and partnerships

TASK FORCE
EDUCATION AND
YOUTH
Enhanced Graz Process
working groups
vocational education

higher education
Young people

and training
general education

democratic citizenship and

management of diversity
history
 30

Other problems have emerged in the course of transition. Among them are:
• decline in GDP and the average real income per capita;
• increase in income inequality, relative increase in poverty and massive unemployment;
• deterioration of life expectancy;
• low level of human potential development;
• spreading culture of lawlessness and the rise of corruption, violence and crime;
• hostilities and clashes on national, ethnic and religious grounds;
• rise of gender segregation in administrations and employment;
• weakening of the system of social protection and support;

In a situation where the non-democratic structures of the past are interwoven with severe
economic restrictions, ethnic and national tensions and conflicts, as well as with the slow
development of domestic human potential, new social and political mechanisms are
insufficient in promoting the many changes needed for the reconstruction and well-being of
eastern European societies. Education generally receives little attention from the government
or from other important sectors, including the economy. Its potential to create change is
frequently underestimated by national policy makers and results in insufficient funds and
assistance. Apart from economic and social reforms and the promotion of co-operation and
stability in regions, more systemic and extensive work needs to be done on the substance and
on the context of education. Strengthening the instrumental role of education in democratic
development means ensuring quality learning, particularly in democratic citizenship. The
need for integrated and immediate action regionally forms the basic strategy in the Stability
Pact for the South and Eastern Europe. The scheme of the activities planned, including
education, is presented in Picture 2.

However, efficient co-ordination between the substance of education and the context, in
which it takes place, is also much needed in western countries where the context of education
is becoming so powerful that it might soon threaten the very essence of education, i.e. in
meeting the development needs of an individual and society and in increasing the citizen’s
active, autonomous and informed participation in democratic processes. These are the values
on which the idea of learning for democratic citizenship is based.

1.1.4 Educational reforms and learning for democratic citizenship

European education systems have been reformed throughout history, often for reasons that lay
outside the main purposes of education. What makes new reforms different from those in the
past is the nature and scope for change. As stated earlier in this chapter, they are more
integrated, holistic and dependent on wider national and international factors, including rapid
changes in science and technology, as well as on the needs and interests of the civic sector.
The growing sensitivity of citizens to educational issues means that education still enjoys an
important role in human development, and that mistakes carried out in the educational
process are more or less irreparable later.

Unfortunately, systematic, longitudinal, and comparative analyses of educational reforms in

Europe based on a set of indicators that integrate democratic change are still missing. The few
surveys and studies that cover different geographical areas focussing on different issues and
 31

applying different methodologies do not provide reliable information on the situation in

Europe as a whole.

Civic education is now being taught throughout Europe and human rights education will soon
enter schools. However, little is known of the quality and of methods and teaching materials
used in the different educational settings, as well as on the existing partnerships of those
involved in attaining civic education goals. The provision of information on civic education,
human rights education and intercultural education in schools and in teachers'training
workshops does not necessarily bring results, although, this innovation is expected to be more
efficient than the traditional methods. Civic education using the new methods is not about
introducing new learning content but about changing learning conditions and helping both
teachers and students be better prepared for responsibilities held in society.

The results achieved from using the new information and skills may be positive or in some
situations negative depending on the context and background of those involved. The success
of new curricula, programmes and activities can not be, therefore, taken for granted. Their
effectiveness should be continuously and systematically monitored and evaluated by various
sources, including students and teachers, research institutions and public bodies. The
assessments should aim to discover whether the atmosphere in the schools is improved by
changes in behaviour of the individual and if the democratic community19 is strengthened.

A quick look at world education profiles developed by IBE,20 provides confirmation that
contemporary educational reforms are more holistic, systematic and contextual than before.
Their main aim is to enhance the quality of education. Although economic goals, such as
increases in national output, creation of new jobs, preservation of employment, and the
reinforcement of competitiveness, still occupy the top positions on educational reform
agendas throughout Europe, these goals are becoming more and more balanced with the other
aims of education, such as social cohesion and citizens'empowerment.21 By equipping all
students with the knowledge and skills necessary to meet future challenges in addition to
strengthening an educational environment that promotes autonomy, self-management,
partnerships and security, the reforms are now being justified.

A complete revision of educational systems, including structure and organisation,

management, curriculum, textbooks, teaching methods, teachers'qualifications, as well as
legislation and financing, is under way in most countries. In some cases the issue of
responsibility for carrying out the reform, is also included. Changes in education are being
carried out to strengthen the school's role in: a) promoting economic and social (sustainable)
development; b) targeting inequality and exclusion; and c) promoting students'mastering of
multiple knowledge levels and skills. Consequently, education is being perceived as a lifelong

19
A valuable contribution to this issue is the study by the Department of the Ministry of Flanders conducted by
M. Elchardus and his colleagues. For the summary of the report see: Elchardus, M. Kavadias, D. and Siongers, J.
Can School Educate? Influence of schools on the values of their pupils. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 19 Nov
1999, document DECS/EDU/CIT (99) 65.
20
World Data on Education. 2nd ed. Geneve: IBE, 1998.
21
See, for example: Accomplishing Europe through Education and Training: Study Group on Education and
Training Report. Brussels: European Commission, 1997.
 32

process, with the main focus being on making provisions for lifelong learning both in and out
of school.

Based on the IBE report, the main features of educational reforms in Europe are:

A) General goals
• promote human resource development
• adjust to individual needs; develop life and personal skills;
• safeguard social priorities;
• enlarge and rationalise educational resources;
• improve academic competitiveness at international level;
• guarantee equality in education;
• increase respect for academic freedom in teaching, learning and research;

B) Structure and organisation

• expand secondary and higher education to ensure equal opportunities for all;
• develop educational provisions to ensure lifelong learning;
• develop student support services as part of the educational process (guidance and
counselling, welfare, medical and psychological assistance);
• establish strong and diversified support systems for schools;

C) Management
• promote autonomy of schools, including decentralisation and transparency in decision-
making;
• involve local forces in school management (parents, community)
• improve accountability of all involved in the educational process;
• develop a common school culture based on rules drawn up on a joint basis;

D) Curriculum development
• ensure more choice and flexibility in education by programme planning, extended
optional instruction and a diversified combination of teaching/learning materials and
methods;
• ensure closer links between general education and vocational education and training;
• link knowledge, skills and value in teaching and learning;
• review curricula for ethnocentric, racist and xenophobic biases;
• integrate regional and international aspects into the curriculum;
• intensify foreign language teaching;
• make more use of local resources in programme implementation;
• develop quality minority programmes;
• develop more efficient approaches for exceptional students and students at risk;
• make better use of research and improve the transfer of knowledge from research
institutions to schools;
 33

E) Assessment and evaluation

• develop the assessment process for the results of learning;
• introduce a greater number of non-graded subjects at all the stages of school;
• make improvements after assessment;
• include students and parents in the assessment procedure;
• develop a monitoring system that provides comprehensive information on the quality of
the services provided and which could lead to measures for improvement;

F) New Technologies
• make better use of information technologies in schools;
• provide lifelong opportunities for learning in line with technological development;
• initiate computer assisted programmes, such as “on-line schools”;
• develop competence in information technologies based on creativity, research and
innovation;

G) Financing
• bring educational budgets closer to standards in OECD countries (5.8%);
• rationalisation and fair distribution of educational budgets;
• diversification of financial resources for education and training;

H) Links
• give statutory recognition to partnerships;
• promote co-operation and partnerships between schools and the community (parents,
NGOs, community associations, etc.) in determining goals in schools and in carrying out
school activities;
• promote school-industry/trade links; combine courses with in-company training in VET;
• promote schools, teachers and student links and exchanges nationally, regionally and
internationally;
I) Students
• enhance motivation for learning
• give greater care to students at risk,

J) Teachers
• improve pre-service and in-service training of teachers and other educational personnel;
• promote active teacher participation in educational reforms;
• improve working conditions and social status of teachers.

Will these changes bring long-lasting benefits to both the individual and society in a way that
will nurture civic life and democracy? How close are these reforms to the goals of education
for democratic citizenship, i.e. to the life-long development of informed, active, and
responsible citizens able to solve personal and community problems with the help of
democratic principles and institutions?

Active participation in shaping civil society of the future depends on inter-related and inter-
dependent factors. To respond effectively to the requirements of democracy and civic society,
primarily means responding to the challenges of protecting human dignity in a complex and
 34

rapidly changing world. This is not an easy-to-reach a goal. It depends on being able to
develop "common civic capital" through, what Bernstein calls "negotiation over meaning" in
which diverse "voices" are listened to and respected. A citizen’s knowledge of his or her
rights and responsibilities means very little if it is not combined with certain difficult to teach
ideals: the values of equality, justice and pluralism; commitment to action; awareness of
national and/or international means for exercising, and strengthening these rights and
responsibilities.

There is no doubt that most European educational reforms meet these requirements. As
pointed out earlier, they are more holistic than before, more learner-centred and action-
oriented and more responsive to the needs of democratic society. However, the core of
learning for democratic citizenship is the balance between the What, How and Why of
educational change. Thus, one of the most crucial aspects of the new initiatives is the
justification of their aims and methodology in attaining social goals. If, for example, directive
teaching predominates in preparing young people for democracy, one needs to know how
such a practice contributes to the development of active and responsible citizenship and why
it is more appropriate than other approaches. Similarly, if active approaches predominate, it is
important to justify their choice and explain how and why knowledge and skills learned in
this way are better guardians of democracy than learning "by the book".

The issue of justification is linked to the question of how much policy making is influenced
by education. Is education powerful or is it powerless? What does education actually do
today? Do other sectors of society respect intrinsic educational principles and laws? Are there
any intrinsic educational laws? Is the role of education only to serve and assist or can it also
be served and assisted?

The primary role of modern education is to meet society' s needs in preparing each individual
to participate actively, creatively and responsibly in managing democratic processes for the
benefit of all. Developing a culture of rights and responsibilities means learning a new body
of knowledge, skills and values that become meaningless if, for example, the economic
requirements for their immediate application are lacking. As a result, there is very little that
education can actually change if educational goals are not in harmony with those in other
sectors of society and without harmonisation with mainstream reforms.

1.1.5 Education for democratic citizenship and related approaches

As already mentioned, the idea of learning for democratic citizenship is founded on a great
number of innovative approaches that have emerged as educational responses to social,
scientific, and technological challenges. The diverse approaches in education reflect the
differences in priorities concerning social stability in the community, the country, the region
and the world. Approaches focus on: human rights; strengthening social cohesion by
promoting peace and non-violence; citizens'responsibility; promoting cultural pluralism and
tolerance to diversity; or global interdependence issues, etc. These approaches are to be found
in compulsory or optional school subjects, others permeate the educational process cross-
culturally, and some are implemented outside school through community actions.

Although they differ in focus and in implementation, their long-term goals are the same, i.e.
the promotion of the responsibility for sustainable democracy based on universal human
 35

values. Since this is precisely what education for democratic citizenship is all about, it is
necessary to outline similarities and differences between education for democratic citizenship
and other innovative approaches (see Picture 3).

Picture 3: Education for democratic citizenship and related approaches

human rights
education
civic
education

education for democratic

citizenship

peace
education
intercultural
education

global
education

1.1.5.1. Education for democratic citizenship and civic education

Since the relationship of education for democratic citizenship with civic education has
already been discussed in the first part of this report, here follows a few additional points.

Civic education is nowadays widely implemented in Europe both in formal education, as a

separate school subject or cross-curricularly, and in non-formal programmes. It aims at
promoting active and responsible citizenship in modern democracies. It focuses on the share
of power in society in constitutional and legal provisions, i.e. in the relationship between the
rights and responsibilities of citizens and democratic governments. Apart from promoting
knowledge on the functioning of democracy and the role of citizens in a democratic society,
civic education stresses the importance of citizens'active participation in decision-making
processes and their responsibilities for the future of civil society22. According to CIVITAS
22
See: Torney-Purta, J.; J.Schwille and J.-A. Amadeo Civic Education Across Countries: Twenty four National
case Studies from the IEA Civic Education Project. Amsterdam: International Association for Evaluation of
Educational Achievement, 1999; National Standards for Civics and Government. Calabasas: Center for Civic
Education, 1994; "Education for citizenship". Educational Innovation and Information. No. 82, 1996.
 36

International's "Statement of Principles of Effective Civic Education", effective civic

education includes:
• basic understanding of how democracy and its institutions work;
• understanding the rule of law and human rights as reflected in international treaties and
other agreements;
• enhancement of participatory skills which empower students to address the problems in
their society;
• extensive use of interactive teaching methods and student-centered learning; and
• promoting a culture of democracy and peace within the school and all aspects of society.

The aim of civic education is sometimes reduced to political literacy understood in the
context of state-based political education. To overcome such limits, it is important to
differentiate between citizens'commitment to a state-based democracy and their recognition
of and commitment to the universal principles of human rights, the rule of law, pluralism,
equality, civil society and the values that different states promote and protect in other ways.

In this context, UNESCO uses the expression "civic education with an international
dimension". In Council of Europe documents, civic education is defined by four dimensions:
human rights, democracy, development and peace, as well as by several educational
principles, such as pluralism, multi-level perspectives, institutional integrity, holistic
approach and cultural literacy. Linking the cultural dimension with citizenship is now widely
accepted under the term "multicultural citizenship".23

If civic education is considered in terms of preparing young people for informed, active and
responsible participation in democracy based on respect for universal human rights, equality,
justice and pluralism, its goals are similar to the ones of education for democratic citizenship.
On the contrary, if civic education is considered as political education which aims at
preparing young people to be loyal citizens in democratic regimes that are blind to inequality,
social exclusion, lawlessness and social integration, then, the differences between these two
approaches are too significant to be easily ignored.

1.1.5.2. Education for democratic citizenship and human rights education

Despite an increased interest in human rights issues in schools in the last few years, human
rights education still remains an umbrella-term for a number of out-of-school programmes
and activities that focus on promoting human dignity.24 Most of these programmes have been
developed by national or international NGOs. They tend to raise individual and group
awareness on issues such as the universality, indivisibility and inalienability of human rights
and freedoms as well as helping citizens counter inequality based on sex, ethnicity, language,
religion, social status or other discriminatory traits. Consequently, human rights educators
consider three dimensions in human rights teaching and learning:

23
For more clarification of the term, see: Kymlicka, W. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority
Rights. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1995.
24
See: Andreopoulos, G.J. i Claude, R.P. (eds.) Human Rights Education for the Twenty-First Century.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997; Leah, L. Human Rights: Questions and Answers. Paris:
UNESCO Publishing, 1996; Osler, A. and Starkey, H. Teacher Education and Human Rights. London: David
Fulton Publishers, 1996; Ray, D. et al. Education for Human Rights. Paris: UNESCO/IBE, 1994.
 37

• acquisition of knowledge about human rights;

• acquisition of attitudes and skills for the promotion and protection of human rights;
• development of an environment that promotes learning and teaching in human rights.

These three dimensions are treated differently, depending on the specific human rights
education approach:25
• the historical approach - most popular in the past; focuses on teaching human rights in a
historical dimension and stresses its evolution in a harmonious society;
• the international standards of human rights and their protection approach - one of the
most popular recent approaches, it helps students learn how to apply international
standards and instruments for the protection of human rights to combat injustice and
discrimination, it may encompass the other three dimensions;
• the re-constructive approach - mostly promoted by social critics who see human rights as
a way of empowering citizens to carry out social change. Although it includes all three
dimensions, it is primarily concerned with pro-active attitudes and concrete actions;
• the value approach - focuses on promoting human rights as a system of interrelated
values that direct behaviour. Human dignity and integrity are linked to five core values:
personal freedom, democratic participation, equal opportunities, economic equity and a
sustainable environment. This approach encompasses all three dimensions.

Despite the variety of programmes offered, human rights education is still unrecognised in a
great number of European schools. This problem was addressed at the UNESCO Regional
Conference on Education for Human Rights in Europe held in Turku/Abo in 199726. It was
also pointed out that, despite the fact that human rights have become a main political ideology
in our time, it is still not possible to say whether human rights education programmes match
the high standards of promotion and protection as defined by the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and other regional and international documents.

Human rights education is the target value of education for democratic citizenship. The rights
and responsibilities of citizens, their awareness and commitment to universal human rights
and freedoms, equality, the rule of law and pluralism, are at the centre of education for
democratic citizenship. The promotion and protection of human rights is the main social
action for a responsible citizen. It, therefore, encompasses not only factual knowledge about
human rights, including international and regional instruments, but also knowledge of
procedures and skills for its promotion and protection at local, national and international
level.

1.1.5.3. Education for democratic citizenship and intercultural education

The educational answer to cultural pluralism is usually termed ' intercultural'or '
multicultural
education' (less often ' interethnic education' , 'inter-racial education' and ' multiethnic
education'). Although there is no consensus in the academic community on what intercultural
education is or should be, one of the most common definitions is that it consists of a variety
25
Reardom, B.A. Educating for Human Dignity: Learning about Human Rights and Responsibilities: A K-12
Teaching Resource. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995.
26
Spilipoulou Akermark, S. (ed.) Human Rights Education: Achievement and Challenges. Turku/Abo: Institute
for Human Rights, Finnish National Commission for UNESCO and UNESCO, 1998;
 38

of both formal and non-formal educational programmes that have the aim of promoting
mutual understanding and respect between the members of different cultural groups.
However, some authors argue that intercultural education is more about perspective than
about curriculum. 27

As with other approaches, intercultural education appears in many forms. James Banks
distinguishes three types of programmes:28
• content-focused programmes ('programmes for cultural understanding 'or ' programmes
about cultural differences' ) - usually aiming at introducing two or more cultural
perspectives in school curricula and involving the study of one or more ethnic/minority
groups;
• student-centred programmes (' compensatory or transitional programmes' ) - cultural or
linguistic help for students, usually from a minority group, help make the transition to
mainstream curriculum. It is mostly carried out in combination with foreign language and
mother tongue language courses;
• socially-oriented programmes (' programmes for social reconstruction'or 'human relations
programmes) - designed to strengthen social relations in school and society by promoting
intercultural understanding and reducing racism and prejudices, as well as by reforming
school curricula and the political-cultural context of schooling. It focuses on co-operative
learning and social initiatives at school level.

Although intercultural programmes define cultural pluralism as their goals, few teaching and
learning materials actually apply the principle of cultural co-operation in terms of cultural
exchange and co-construction which is the prerequisite for citizens'' multiple acculturation'
(Banks). Programmes are still designed mostly for minority students and only a small number
aim at promoting minority students' empowerment by raising their awareness of the
contribution their cultures have made to mainstream cultures. Often the presentation of
minority cultures is stereotyped and reduced to a few cultural traits, such as clothing, food,
and folk music, showing the ' homeland'solely through traditional cultural forms.

An important point in this respect is made by P. Belanger in his Report on the Warsaw
Conference on Education for Democratic Citizenship:

"Intercultural education bears implicit risks of overemphasising the culture and in that way of deepening
cultural differences. In order to avoid potential cultural centrism, intercultural education needs to be
inspired by and developed from a global perspective. This approach affirms an open concept of cultural
identity. Global cultural approach contributes to deconstructing cultural centrism."29

27
See: Perotti, A. The Case for Intercultural Education. Stracbourg: Council of Europe Press, 1994; Fennes, H.
and Hapgood, K. Intercultural Learning in the Classroom. London and Washington: Cassel, 1997; Mitchell,
B.M. and Salsbury, R.E. Multicultural Education: An International Guide to Research, Policies, and Programs.
Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996; Sleeter, C.E. Empowerment Through Multicultural Education. Albany, N.Y.:
State University of New York, 1991;
28
Banks, J.A. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education. New York: Simon and Schuster
Macmillan, 1995.
29
Belanger, P. Conference on Education for Democratic Citizenship: Methods, Practices and Strategies.
Warsaw, 4-8 December, 1999: Final Report, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2000, document DECS/EDU/CIT
(2000) 4, p. 17.
 39

In the context of education for democratic citizenship inter-culturalism is seen as one of the
leading principles of educational activity in a culturally plural society. It stresses the
importance of bringing different cultures to the educational environment and of enriching it
by raising students'awareness of their background and identity. It promotes the development
of a shared school culture based on knowledge of and respect for different life-styles present
in school. Its long-term aims are to confront ethnocentrism, racism, prejudices and
stereotypes as well as inequalities and discrimination in school and society, including the
impact of hidden curricula. Intercultural education emphasises the development of cultural
sensitivity and the awareness of the self and others. It creates an openness towards other
cultures and intercultural skills, including communication and highlights cross-cultural
experiences and, above all, the uniqueness and worth of each culture and its contribution to
humanity.

1.1.5.4. Education for democratic citizenship and peace education

Preparation of young people for peace and non-violence is the central theme in peace
education programmes that first appeared in the liberation and peace movements. They guide
students to a better understanding of the principles and techniques of non-violent action, the
causes of conflict, violence and war, and the obstacles to peaceful resolution of disputes. The
programmes also help students develop skills for peaceful and non-violent action, including
dialogue, negotiation, facilitation, mediation and co-operation between conflicting parties.
Major educational changes in this field have been initiated by local and international NGOs.30

In the forty years, since the first programmes appeared, peace education programmes have
passed through the following stages of development:
• from nuclear threat to disarmament - the first programmes focused on issues of nuclear
threat and poverty; disarmament was introduced shortly afterwards in discussions on de-
militarisation;
• from non- violence to positive peace - the former idea of non-violence seen as the
foundation of peace in the 80s has been replaced by the idea of positive peace seen as the
foundation of social stability; positive peace is based on respect for universal human
rights, equality and justice;
• from knowing about peace to the culture of peace - now understood not only in terms of
knowing about war and peace but of being actively committed to developing global peace.
The culture of peace is considered to resist violence through the promotion of human
freedom and dignity, equality and respect for life and by introducing the learner to non-
violent strategies, dialogue, mediation and non-prejudiced perception of others.

By promoting active participation for democratic development, education for democratic

citizenship also promotes citizens'responsibilities for social stability which are linked to the
notion of global peace and non-violence. Both the culture of rights and responsibilities and
30
See: Bjerstedt, A. Peace Education in Different Countries. Malmo: School of Education, 1988; Burns, R.J. i
Aspeslagh, R. (ed.) Three Decades of Peace Education Around the World. New York and London: Garland
Publishing, 1996; UNESCO and a Culture of Peace: Promoting a Global Movement. Paris: Culture of Peace
Programme of UNESCO, 1995.
 40

the culture of peace are mutually reinforcing. They convey the idea of interconnectedness and
interdependency of citizens’ actions at all levels and stress commitment to justice and mutual
respect. Education for democratic citizenship does not attempt to end violence and conflicts
as such, although it does try to understand the phenomena better and tries to remove the
structural barriers that incite violence and hamper efforts in solving conflicts in a peaceful
and non-violent manner.

1.1.5.5. Education for democratic citizenship and global education

Educators argue that modern education should foster students'awareness of the increasingly
integrated nature of the contemporary world and should enable them to meet global
challenges. They define global education as an innovative approach that attempts to help
students understand the principles and problems of interdependency in a world of diversities,
as well as acquire global consciousness and skills for dealing with global problems, such as
human rights violation, large-scale inequalities, hunger, poverty and environmental
degradation. 31

There are several alternative approaches to global education. All of them include such factors
as:
• cross-cultural understanding (recognition of the multiplicity and complexity of cultures
in the world, understanding the role of one'
s own culture in the world system);
• perspective consciousness or multiple perspectives (recognition that, since human beliefs
and choices differ, one' s own understanding is not universally shared and that the
approaches of others may be equally relevant for solving global problems);
• awareness of global systems and global dynamics (including transactions in the economy,
politics, ecology and technology across nations and regions);
• state of the planet awareness (understanding global issues such as the unequal use of
world resources, large-scale migration, crises in the environment, population growth,
uneven development, obstacles to security);
• understanding global history (acquiring a historical approach to contemporary
interdependency, including openness to new ideas on such issues as power in the
interpretation of history).

In conclusion, global education fosters an appreciation of both cultural differences and

similarities. It also enhances the development of multiple perspectives and the consciousness
of different situations. The main tasks are to promote an understanding of the world as an
interdependent and interconnected system of activities and cultures; to make students
understand how local decisions affect and are affected by global dynamics. Global education
is closely linked to education for democratic citizenship for several reasons: the development
of global awareness depends on a critical approach to reality; global awareness takes account

31
See: Merryfield, M.M.; Jarchow, E. and Pickert, S. (eds.) Preparing Teachers for Global Perspectives: A
Handbook for Teacher Educators. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press and Sage, 1997; Hanvey, R.G. An Attainable
Global Perspective, New York: Centre for War/Peace Studies, 1975; Hitachi, S.V. and Dall, F. Situation Report
on the Global Education Project in MENA. Amman. UNICEF/MENARO, 1995; Linking and Learning for
Global Change: International Workshop Report. Lisbon: North-South Centre, 1999.
 41

of the way powerful states hinder democratic changes; it is also concerned with the
responsibility of citizens and their readiness for action based on the values of universal
human rights, equality and justice.

1.2. Where learning for democratic citizenship takes place

1.2.1 Formal Education

1.2.1.1. The School

One of the most common definitions of school throughout history is that it is an institution of
great social importance entrusted with the task of transmitting to younger generations
knowledge, values, beliefs and behaviour important for political stability, social cohesion,
economic well-being and cultural continuation of the community. Although some 20th
century social critics have seriously questioned the school'
s mission on the grounds of, inter
alia, its reduced relevance to a successful life and its role in the reproduction of social
inequality and injustice, for the majority of young people in the world school still plays an
important role in their cognitive and social development.

However, its traditional formative function has been profoundly challenged in the last
decades by political, scientific and technological developments. The need to strengthen
democracy, civil society, the diversification of non-formal and informal educational services
and delivery systems, as well as the promotion of the right of self-determination in education
according to one' s needs, have made schools adopt new educational approaches and new
relationships within and across their boundaries.

Since learning for democratic citizenship is understood as a multifaceted and a lifelong

process that prepares citizens for informed, active, productive and responsible participation in
society, effective implementation of new concepts and practices in schools presupposes the
following:
• society's recognition of the school's role in promoting education for democratic
citizenship goals, including decentralisation of educational policy, transparency in
decision-making, and the accountability of all the players;
• existence of multiform and flexible learning opportunities, including curriculum structure,
teaching and learning approaches, assessment procedures, existence of out-of-school
programmes and their links to school activities;
• school atmosphere and ethos, including norms of behaviour, attitudes, beliefs and
practices that promote individual dignity; strengthen participation, responsibility and
accountability; minimise hidden curricula; and facilitate democratic teacher-student,
student-administration, teacher-administration and school-parent relationships;
• self belief in teachers and students and high expectations in education as well as in each
other, in particular, their beliefs in the probability of attaining personal and social goals by
learning and/or teaching the content offered;
• partnerships between schools and other educational and non-educational institutions
nationally and internationally, including research centres, non-governmental
 42

organisations, professional and community associations, trade unions, media, church,

small and middle-size companies, etc.

The quest for learning for democratic citizenship changes schools from formative (teaching-
based) to constructive and transformative (learning-based) educational institutions. The new
task is not to impart knowledge and create model behaviour in students according to pre-
existing expert/scientific criteria but to bring about and facilitate learning. School can only
manage this task by creating opportunities for personal growth based on the respect for
individuality and dignity.

These opportunities are linked to diversified knowledge (declarative, procedural, critical and
transformative); and diversified skills (adaptive, reproductive, constructive and applicative)
that are learned, maintained and further developed through:
• acting and interacting;
• participating and mediating
• co-operating and sharing;
• debating and negotiating;
• constructing, deconstructing and reconstructing;
• imagining and anticipating.

Multiple learning opportunities are at the core of a supportive environment. According to B.

Reardom, the classroom environment should provide support by:32
• helping students feel important, valued and unique;
• allowing students to function autonomously;
• helping students feel safe, comfortable and trusting;
• promoting empathy, friendship and respect for others;
• structuring opportunities in which students work co-operatively;
• providing recognition for accomplishment and differences;
• providing opportunities for students to understand themselves and to communicate their
ideas and feelings about themselves and the others;

By providing diversified content and means for active learning in a supportive educational
climate, schools become "democratic micro-communities" in which the rights and
responsibilities of all the actors are equally distributed and daily exercised, aiming to ensure
individual and collective empowerment (see Picture 4).

32
Reardom, B.A. Tolerance - The Threshold of Peace: Teacher-training Resource Unit. Paris: UNESCO
Publishing, 1997, p. 37.
 43

strengthen horizontally
individual and distribute the
collective rights and
capacity for responsibilities of
change all

schools as democratic micro-

offer multiple communities develop co-
oportunities for operation and
learning and partnership
personal between all actors
growth

promote inclusion ensure a safe and

and social supportive
cohesion environment

Picture 4: Aspects of schools functioning as democratic micro-communities

1.2.1.2. Teacher qualifications in education for democratic citizenship

As with many other issues in education for democratic citizenship, the structure, contents,
intensity and objectives of teacher training in Europe show considerable diversity.
Furthermore, the situation has changed rapidly in the past decade, due to reform efforts in
teacher training that were carried out in many educational systems across Europe. Therefore,
much more research work will be needed to fully determine the present situation of teacher
training in education for democratic citizenship in Europe. However, for the purpose of this
study, some general observations seem possible:
• Political Science is frequently considered the “leading discipline” in the studies of civic
education teachers. Its core issues and content (“policy, polity and politics” and its sub-
disciplines of national and international politics, political theory, political sociology etc.)
are included in or form the backbone of teacher training curricula for civic education.
• Many civic education teachers acquired qualifications in other Social Science subjects
(such as Pedagogy or Sociology) or in the Humanities (for example, History or
Philosophy). Because of the relatively marginal importance of civic education and
education for democratic citizenship issues in the educational system, a specialised
training for civic education teachers (that is, in Political or Social Science) is not an
educational priority in many countries. Moreover, the lower the school level for which a
teacher qualifies, the less important his or her original choice of academic discipline
seems to be. Thus, in elementary schools, civic education issues are more frequently dealt
 44

with by Geography teachers or in the context of the native language tuition than in
secondary schools where special civic education curricula usually exist.
• The percentage of teachers that teach civic education and are specifically qualified for
teaching the subject is – in comparison to other school subjects – relatively low. This
applies to most, if not all, European countries. In Germany, for example, the percentage of
qualified civic education teachers is no more than 55-60 percent (i.e. around 40 percent of
civic education lessons are provided by teachers not actually trained for the subject
(“Fachfremder Unterricht”).
• The “status” of civic education is low in comparison to other school subjects – not only in
educational policies and in (national) curricula, but also in the teachers’ own perspective.
Some teachers might even be tempted to think that civic education is an “easy subject”
involving little preparatory work and that it is “low on facts, but rich in empty chat”. It is
open to debate whether such views are a reason or a consequence of the “structural
deficits” outlined above.

Besides the more general pedagogical aims for which all teacher training is directed, some of
the most important objectives of teacher training for education for democratic citizenship are
focused on the following processes:
• transfer of education for democratic citizenship related knowledge
• transfer of didactical-methodological knowledge and competence
• approaches to multi-disciplinarity with a view to creating “reference disciplines” in
education for democratic citizenship
• enabling competent use of scientific methods and experience
• acquisition of social and pedagogical skills
• acquisition of formal qualifications (certificates as pre-conditions for teaching).

Teacher training for civic education takes place in three organisational forms: pre-service
training, in-service training, and further education. A newer development is the advent of
formal and informal further education opportunities relying on technology.

A) Pre-service teacher training

This form of teacher training is generally provided by teacher training colleges or universities.
The courses usually continue over a minimum of three years. Generally, the final examination
of teachers takes place under close supervision from governmental authorities, in most cases
it is organised and recognised by the State, even though the provider of the training courses
might be a private or commercial educational institution. In many countries, a full teaching
qualification requires taking a theoretical exam at the end of the course and a practice-
oriented exam which usually takes place after a one- or two-year training period as an
assistant teacher.

In teacher training colleges, and increasingly in universities, too, great importance is

attributed to the combination of theoretical, practical and methodical knowledge acquisition.
Curricular concepts for teacher training for civic education provide for a relatively smooth
integration of practical training experience into the general training process. However,
because of the more theoretical nature of the knowledge transferred by universities,
university-trained teachers are frequently faced with greater difficulties in the adaptation of
that knowledge to their teaching than their colleagues who were trained at teacher training
colleges.
 45

B) In-service teacher training

This form comprises “in-house” training courses, distance education methods, media-
supported training and other forms of organised learning that can be conducted without
interruption of the participants’ own teaching duties. In most cases organised by universities
or teacher training colleges, in-service teacher training is particularly valuable if there is a
need to qualify larger numbers of teachers within a limited time-span for a new subject (as
was the case with the training of new civic education teachers in post-Communist societies
during the transition to Democracy). In-service courses, however, are also helpful in adapting
the competencies and skills of existing teaching staff to rapidly changing programme contents
or conditions (as is the case of the new communication technologies).

Depending on the objectives of the in-service training, state-recognised certificates might or

might not be provided. If a certified qualification for a new subject is to be acquired through
in-service training, some critics point to an apparently inherent dilemma of such training
measures. A two- or three year in-service course will necessarily be limited to a maximum of
15 hours of study per week (because the participants, who are usually adults, need time for
their own families and have to continue with their normal working schedule of teaching in the
classroom, preparatory work, assessment etc. while studying simultaneously). Whether such
courses yield qualifications comparable to a three-year full-time study course at a university
of teacher training college is open to debate.

The proponents of in-service studies point to the fact that their participants bring with them
much more experience and social competencies and in most cases more efficient and more
economical learning styles than young university students. They also argue that in the
development of curricular concepts for in-service training, particular attention is given to the
specific needs of the participants.

As a wealth of experience from many in-service teacher training courses for civic education
has shown, in-service training courses can yield qualification results comparable to full-time
studies if certain conditions are met:
• the need of finding the “right balance” between the teachers professional needs and
the wider (scientific or theoretical) knowledge given;
• the need of finding the balance between the teachers (professional and private) time-
schedule and the optimal time requirements of the training process;
• the need for in-service teacher training curricula to take into consideration – and to
make active use of – the professional experience and self-esteem of the participants,
who are, after all, not new-comers but qualified and often very experienced teachers.
• Finally, in-service teacher training should always be followed up by continuing or
further education in order to enable in-depth studies.

C) Formal and informal further education measures

In many countries, a broad offer of specialised learning opportunities concerning democracy,
economics and social topics is directed at teachers. In most Western countries there is hardly
a professional group that enjoys a richer selection of formal, that is organised and
institutionalised further education measures, be it in the form of ad-hoc seminars about a wide
range of topics, didactical and methodological work-shops or media-supported learning and
“virtual seminars”.
 46

There is also an abundance of informal further education opportunities for teachers, such as
didactical and methodological material produced by governmental agencies, non-
governmental groups or commercial publishing firms. This applies particularly to education
for democratic citizenship content matters and to economic matters. Many commercial
companies, too, such as banks, insurance companies and other large companies, run special
supportive programmes for teachers with the aim of bringing them closer to their products
(for example, computers). However, these learning opportunities are sometimes at variance
with the readiness and motivation of teachers to engage in further education.

D) Online information for education for democratic citizenship teaching purposes

With the advent of world-wide communication and information opportunities, a wide field of
resources for civic education and education for democratic citizenship purposes has opened
up for the teachers. In fact, these developments will probably influence the structure, contents
and methods of teaching much more than can be anticipated at present.

Multimedia, cable and satellite television and other forms of audio-visual presentation will
become more frequent in the classroom; issues concerning their didactical and
methodological use must, therefore, be integrated into the teacher training curricula. The
furthest-reaching changes, however, will be brought about by the Internet – the world-wide
(global) network of computers. With regard to teacher training, its main advantages are that it
enables access to practically any information needed for the teaching process. It also offers
insight into the teaching styles, curricula and methods used in other countries or cultures.
Furthermore, it opens up opportunities for a global exchange of information between teachers
and an exchange of practical experience. With easy access to a wide array of classroom
models, didactical approaches, methodological suggestions, many new ideas are made
available to the teacher. Historical, theoretical and other important materials needed for
education for democratic citizenship purposes are available at the tip of a finger. Newsgroups
and Chat-Rooms for teachers potentially enable teachers to communicate with each other
about practical problems of teaching as well as about topical issues of education for
democratic citizenship.
 47

E) Some observations on the future developments in teacher training for education for
democratic citizenship
Modern societies are clearly heading for a new understanding which could be summarised in
the terms “information society” or “knowledge society”. For the first time in human history,
information and knowledge will be accessible virtually anywhere and anytime. It is this fact
that will profoundly change the shape, structure and contents of education.

Accordingly, civic education teachers need to be prepared for this new learning environment.
It is generally accepted that an information or knowledge society will be characterised by de-
materialisation, communication, high specialisation, abundance of information and
networking. These characteristics underline the need to develop new forms and new contents
in order to maintain and strengthen the professionalism of teachers. Increasingly, teacher
training curricula must be directed at qualifying civic education teaching staff in a way to
enable them to:
• anticipate learning requirements with regard to democratic attitudes rather than to react to
given circumstances, problems or situations;
• differentiate between and develop macro- and micro-techniques for teaching CE rather
than using traditional one-way teaching techniques;
• shape the learning environments of their classrooms and schools so as to make democracy
an everyday experience for students;
• offer support and advice for individual problems and conditions in society.

1.2.1.3 Higher education and education for democratic citizenship

Academic “reference disciplines” of education for democratic citizenship (like Political

Science, Sociology, Economics, Law) have historically contributed considerably to the
development of civic education as a school subject. As a consequence, teaching and learning
about democracy have – like other, similar processes – always been based on the traditional
triangular reference system of “Science – Practice – Person”:

Science examines the (empirical) “truth” of (in the case of civic education, political) issues
and attempts a logical order and categorisation of knowledge. Its task is not to pre-determine
practical actions but to explain events or problems, to propose options for solving problems
and to anticipate the possible consequences.

Scientific experience and knowledge created at universities is transferred to society in several

ways, one of the most important “outlets” is school education. Scientific institutions like
universities also help in shaping the practice of education for democratic citizenship by
qualifying a considerable number of civic education teachers, in particular at secondary
education level. Furthermore, they contribute to the process of further education for teachers.

In spite of these connections, the relationship between the higher education sector and
education for democratic citizenship is also burdened by a certain ambivalence: The
predominance of more or less abstract or theoretical scientific issues in the field of research
and higher education teaching leads to a certain reluctance on the side of universities to make
methodological or didactical issues of knowledge transfer a priority in their work. The
competence and professionalism of civic education teachers, however, depends on their
ability to understand the wider context of increasingly complex political and social problems
 48

(for which they must acquire at least a basic scientific training), their ability to reduce this
complexity for the purpose of transferring knowledge to their students, and their ability to
reflect on their own needs in further education in order to improve their own competence in
the field of education for democratic citizenship.

To sum up: The main function of higher education with regard to education for democratic
citizenship is frequently seen either in providing “the scientific background” for the subject
(i.e. research and explanations of social and political issues) or in providing practice- and
methodology-oriented courses for the training of teachers. This dichotomical view, however,
is not justified: the two areas of responsibility are not only inextricably linked, but in fact
overlap to a great degree and are mutually supportive. But both orientations need to be
improved in order to make the contribution of Higher Education to education for democratic
citizenship more effective and more innovative.

1.2.2. Adult Education

1.2.2.1. Scope and dimensions

There is a wide consensus on the importance of adult education as a tool for personal and
social development and a key to the prevention of intolerance and racism in a democratic
world.33
Its relevance within the field of education for democratic citizenship was brought to light
when, with the falling of political and economic frontiers, “old reliable values” and “solid”
ideologies were questioned and the apparent social and cultural cohesion threatened.
Nowadays post-modern democratic societies require every citizen’s participation, creativity
and competence. Their growing heterogeneity, backgrounds, profiles and multiple
overlapping roles turn adult education for democratic citizenship into a rather complex task.

The difference between education for children and adults is that the latter refers to a
purposeful effort to foster learning by persons, who have become responsible for their own
lives, being therefore, fully competent to run their own future, including the fundamental
decisions about learning – If, What, When and How.

This statement is even more valid in the present case, as democratic citizenship is neither a
compulsory, nor a functional or utilitarian issue, and these are the kind of reasons that lead
adults to engage in learning experiences.
Additionally it must be stressed that adult education is not an end in itself but a means
towards helping adults acquire the degree of self-reliance necessary to participate actively as
individuals in the social processes for which they are part of.34

33
Unesco Confiteia, Democracy and Peace- Adult Learning, Democracy and Peace,Hamburg,1997
34
Gelpi,E. Towards a Democratic Citizenship:1994-1995 Report, Strasbourg, 1996, doc. DECS/AE (96)9,
Co. Europe CDCC
 49

Adult education encompasses many dimensions, which take place in a variety of fields of
practice. It must be regarded as a lifelong process, a planned series of incidents, directed
towards the participants’ learning and understanding, at any stage in life 35.
In spite of the growing interest of researchers, as witnessed by the large number of papers and
books published in the last few years, there is still a lack of a consistent “corpus of
knowledge” founded on systematic research in the field of Adult Education and its
development has been much supported by empirical evidence.
Adult education’s evolution and conceptualisation is much due to the active support and
involvement of the different international intergovernmental organisations, such as the
Council of Europe, UNESCO, OECD and EU and the same is happening in what concerns
adult education for democratic citizenship.
Learning, the process which individuals go through as they attempt to change or enrich their
knowledge, values, skills, strategies and behaviour, is a key-dimension in adult education for
democratic citizenship.

Taking into account that the only essential condition to the learning process is the learner
himself36 this chapter’s main focus is the adult person as a “teachable”/learning citizen
regardless of any social, educational background or professional status.

This reflection is meant as an attempt to develop a better understanding of the underlying

questions within adult education and training for democratic citizenship, from an epistemic
viewpoint. It was also intended as a possible contribution to identify a comprehensive
framework on learning how to learn about adults’ education for democratic citizenship.

1.2.2.2. The construction of an adult’s identity

Supplying or assisting the democratic citizenship learner with supportive training, helping to
overcome limitations and constraints implies having a good diagnosis of the learner’s
learning conditions, environment, social background, motivations, etc.

An adults’ individuality is determined by numerous factors which affect behaviour and in

turn, how new experiences are approached, how much energy is invested on changing life
patterns, ways of thinking and acting. Experience, self-concept, values and attitudes are some
of the fundamental variables within this framework.

Regarding experience, there is a consensual assumption that the most distinctive feature
distinguishing adults from children is “life experience” , the adults’ uniqueness is partly the
result of these different life experiences.
Experience constitutes the basis for new learning, and it may even require “unlearning” what
was already acquired. And as learning always involves change, i.e., something is added or
taken away, this may cause some discomfort or even pain, in giving up something
comfortable and familiar, and that is why people always resist “remaking” themselves.37

,35Jarvis, P. Adult and continuing Education – Theory and Practice (2nd. Edition). London, 1995.
36
Jarvis, Ibid., p. 1
37
Smith, R.M., Learning How To Learn- Applied Theory for Adults, Buckingham, 1993, Open University Press
 50

Learning implies therefore a new or revised interpretation of the meaning of the learner’s
former experience, modifying his/her biography, thus affecting the manner by which future
situations will be approached and experienced.38

Alternatively, one’s self-concept i.e. the image the individual has of himself, also affects the
way a person deals with the many aspects of life, and namely the way reality is perceived.
Self-portrayal-as-a-learner is perhaps one of the key aspects in regards new learning.
The view that we develop of ourselves is based upon our perception of what others think of
us (especially the “significant others”) and influences personal behaviour and change of
attitudes. Socialisation, the process by which an individual comes to accept attitudes, values
and norms of social groups, in which he is a member, starts in the family as a child and goes
on during adulthood, through primary and secondary experiences.
It is also important to underline that there are many non-learning situations, as well as
attitudes and factors that prevent and hinder learning. Presumptions, stereotypes, prejudices,
distortions (cognitive, socio-cultural and epistemic), non-reflective skills learning or
memorisation are examples of already existing patterns being reproduced as outcomes, an
example of “not learning” in the above-mentioned sense,

Our attitudes are thus largely determined by our past experiences of socialisation and they
“condition”, and shape our responses giving us a particular “set” of attitudes that make us
predictable and consistent in our behaviour. However, even in later stages of adult life, we
may find ourselves modifying our values, as the result of the continuing process of
socialisation in the groups that we belong to39.

1.2.2.3. Training strategies and methods

Many authors have developed significant theories on the comprehension of adults’ learning
and training processes.
Among these, Paulo Freire40 and Mezirow41 have developed interesting models, which also
seem useful in understanding an adults’ democratic citizenship learning/ training framework.
Both question the concept of knowledge, its necessity in changing the structure of teaching
and defend the use of a metacognitive approach.
Both assume everyone has his/her own ideas of reality (“perspectives” for Mezirow). By
reflecting upon one’s own experience, assumptions and impressions new learning is acquired,
and reality is revised.

38
Mezirow, J. & Associates, Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood- A Guide to Transformative and
Emancipators Learning, S..Francisco, 1990, Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers’
39
Lovell R.B., Adult Learning, London, 1992, Routledge.
40
Freire, P., Pedagodia da Autonomia, Saberes Necessários à Prática Educativa, S. Paulo, Editora Paz e Terra,
1997.
41
Mezirow, J. & Associates, Ibid p. 2
 51

Understanding one’s own experience and reinterpreting it in the light of new learning is
known as “ transformative and emancipatory learning”. It implies what Paulo Freire42 calls a
“conscientization”, which raises the learner’s epistemic curiosity. The concept of training,
from the «undervalued world of labour», adds value to the debate on adult education.

Dominicé43 considers that training comes and goes, forward and backward, increasing in the
process of the relationship between knowledge and know-how and is central to an adults’
identity. Within this dialectical process many different methods can used that require
extensive skill according to the type of result or learning requirement desired.

Whether the goal is acquiring new knowledge, understanding a given subject, incorporating
new skills, adopting new attitudes or values, or just satisfying real interests requires different
learning approaches.

From the more “classic” approaches, such as conferences, panels and symposiums, to the
more sophisticated and difficult to put into practice, like mentoring, role-playing, T-groups or
the case study method, there is an immense range of diversified methods and strategies which
make up the growing field of professional practice.

Training adults for democratic citizenship requires the use of a diversity of methods given the
complex nature of the desired results. Exposure to new alternative models or life patterns
may, whatever the methods employed, develop the learner’s interest and motivation to
experiment.

Adult education for democratic citizenship implies a “change of mentality” in a person, a

paradigm shift, which in addition, requires specific educational provisions and systematic
learning support. Assessing cognitive styles, behaviour and attitude patterns must be part of
the learning process.

To set up educational continuums, based on various supportive, participatory methodologies,

allowing time for reflection and enabling the capitalisation and sharing of different
approaches, experiences, results and outcomes, within a sustainable support system seems to
be the core idea in an adults’ training for democratic citizenship learning. A change in adults
is certainly possible, but much work is required!

1.2.3 Non-formal education

1.2.3.1. The changing concept of education

Promoting education for everybody was the idea behind the institutionalisation of educational
systems and compulsory education. This idea grew in the industrialised countries together
with the development of the democratic belief that the general educational level should be
raised thus improving the rights and social benefits of everybody.

42
Freire, P. ,Educação como Prática da Liberdade
43
Dominicé, P., Histoire de Vie comme Processus de Formation, Paris 1991, L’Harmattan
 52

The idea underlying initial (formal) education was that through schooling, at a given stage in
life, individuals were supposed to have stored sufficient knowledge and skills, to serve them
for the remainder of their life, so that their education was complete44.

It was probably not anticipated, that those systems were prone to failure since many parents
would not enrol their children in school, or would take them out of it whenever the required
school standards were not met, or schooling was no longer useful in attaining their personal
projects or expectations in life.
Formal education does not reach everybody and when it does it may also be perceived as a
selective mechanism, rather than as a source of knowledge and skills. Formal education was
the term, Dewey45 referred to when a society wished to transmit all its achievements from one
generation to the subsequent one. Nowadays, “formal education” is frequently replaced by the
term “initial education” as opposed to “further” or “continuous education”.
Continuous education, further education, recurrent education, lifelong education or
community education are just different approaches and attempts to answer the same question:
how can adult learning be developed to promote and encompass all dimensions in life: family,
community, careers, etc.
Adult education is therefore largely concerned with compulsory education failures: both in
the sense of the students, who are failed or fail themselves and in the more abstract sense of
the shortcomings or defects of the school system. Adult education takes place in a great
variety of settings, which, according to Squires46, can be grouped under four broad headings:
• Educational institutions, which exist primarily to teach adults (local authority education
services, Open University, third age Universities, etc.);
• Educational institutions which teach adults along with younger students (polytechnics,
colleges of higher or further education and some universities);
• Non-educational institutions or organizations (voluntary associations, private companies,
churches, trade-unions, etc., to whom teaching adults is a secondary function, or a by-
product of their main activity);
• Non-institutionalized, independent, adult learning settings organised by individuals using
whatever resources are at hand (friends, bookshops, libraries, museums, and so forth).
Continuous education refers more specifically to both vocational and non-vocational post-
initial education. It is generally oriented to further educational development, after entry into
employment or voluntary activities47.
Recurrent education was claimed by Houghton48 to be “the first new idea in education this
century…” This term was much used by the OECD in its 1973 report, as a “comprehensive
alternative strategy, for the reform of the whole education system”. More recently it has been
regarded, in a less ambitious way, as a reformist approach to implement life long education. It

44
Jarvis, P., Ibid p.1
45
Dewey, J.,Democracy and Education, New York, 1966, Free Press
46
Squires, G., in Education for Adults- Culture and Processes of Adult Learning, London, 1993, The Open
University
47
Jarvis,P., Ibid p1.
48
Houghton, V., Recurrent Education: A Plea for Lifelong Learning, London,1974, Ward Lock Educational
Assoc. of Recurrent Education
 53

can also take the form of a «blended life plan», in which, work, education and leisure are
concurrent rather than alternating throughout life49.
Community education in response to felt, expressed needs or demands, is generally designed
to give citizens equal opportunities, empowerment and local control, supported by the
premise that the community is the maker of its own development.
The first reference to education, as «lifelong» is credited to Dewey50. However, it was only
when UNESCO51 adopted and advocated it as a reference concept (1972) that it gained more
prominence.
Life long learning is often described as a process, a set of activities, a conceptual framework
or a philosophy of education. “Life long education is education in its totality. It covers formal,
non-formal and informal patterns of education, and attempts to integrate all structures and
stages of education through vertical (temporal) and horizontal (spatial) dimensions. It is
flexible in time, place, content and adaptable to different techniques of learning. It also
implies a measure of self-direction, sharing of views with others and adapting to various
learning styles and strategies.“52.
A great part of adult education is developed as non-formal education. Non-formal education
can vary, and is more straightforward than formal education.
The teachers, may not be “proper” teachers but termed facilitators, group leaders, tutors,
mentors. Textbooks may not be like those used in school, but selected, according to adults’
interests and levels of knowledge, texts (from newspapers, magazines or regular books) or
contributions from adult learners.
An adults’ class is generally not called a class, but a “group”. Teaching may be referred to as
a “discussion”, or the “learning process”. Indeed, the whole thing may be so unlike school,
that learners themselves may not realise that education is going on.
The fact is, that the most “natural” form of adult-non-formal education is continuous
education, i.e. when education takes an intermittent form, alternating with other activities of
adult existence- work, family life, leisure interests, community responsibilities.
The modular form, organised on a part-time basis over a long time frame, interweaving adult
life experiences and practical work seems to be the most appropriate way of developing adult
learning projects. This process provides a suitable opportunity to build on existing knowledge
and experience53.
Non-formal adult education has also opened up a range of questions about what is normal or
necessary in formal education. Some non-formal adult education methods offer novel
techniques like mentoring and “auditing”.
Informal Education refers to the systematic and cumulative aspects of everyday experiential
learning.

49
Cross,K.P., Adults as Learners – Increasing Participation and Facilitating Learning, S. Francisco, Josey-
Bass Inc. Publishers, 1981.
50
Dewey, J., Ibid. p.4
51
UNESCO, Apprendre à Être, Paris,1972, Fayard
52
Dave, R.H., in Adults as Learner Increasing Participation and Facilitating Learning, S. Francisco, 1991,
Jossey-Bass Inc.
53
Squires, G., Ibid p.4
 54

One of the most controversial questions in non-formal education is the accreditation of

experiential learning which in the long run will affect curriculum design for adult learning,
particularly in what refers to the relationship between theory and practice.

It should be underlined that in the context of adult democratic citizenship learning non-formal
and informal ways of learning imply much weaker boundaries between education and other
aspects of life. Some forms and settings for adult learning have become virtually
indistinguishable from everyday incidental learning.

1.2.3.2 The transversal nature of Democratic Citizenship Learning

There is evidence that most adults do not attend organised training courses, even in non-
formal settings. When they do, it is mostly for professional reasons. However, life long
learning is present in every adult'
s life.

All adult informal learning through experimental “channels” should be considered as

appropriate contexts for Democratic Citizenship Learning. Whatever the goals of;
associations, NGO’s, political parties, clubs or any other adults’ groups, all are ideal for
learning and practising the core abilities and competencies required in democratic citizenship.
Participation, responsibility, respect for one another’s values, respect for common good,
conflict management, negotiation and co-operation can be developed in such activities.
Self-directed learning projects can also be as successful as other learning/training initiatives,
organised by institutions or not. The more self-oriented they are, the more likely they will
respond to a person’s needs and expectations. However, commitment is necessary.
The many types of adult education mirror the different forms of DC learning available to
adults. For this reason, the development and financing of DC learning should be a matter of
governmental policy.
What about adult education for democratic citizenship?

It seems that educating/training adults for democratic citizenship should be part of

sociological policy, however, citizenship learning needs the commitment of individuals.

The ‘learning society’ is a recent concept that stresses the changes that must take place in
society in response to current developments. It implies a broader and more comprehensive
perspective of human learning, as it concerns not only individuals, but also global social
conditions and the interactions between the various actors in society. One of its underlying
assumptions is the recognition of the interdependency between the interests of the community
and the individual.
A specific targeted approach has to be developed for the great majority of adult citizens who
are not aware of the rights they are entitled to. Positive discriminatory measures must be
taken, since no country can claim to be a democracy while a part of its citizens remain
excluded. A democratic society is only achieved by having an informed and educated
population.
Networking and co-operating on action research projects, creating new learning opportunities,
assessing good practices and working together on barriers seem to be the best means of
developing collective adult education projects for Democratic Citizenship Learning.
 55

Citizenship sites represent the empirical component of the Council of Europe Education for
Democratic Project and provide good examples of EDC practices.

Networks as opposed to “vertical” organisations can help develop local identities, a sense of
belonging and participation, and develop without “blurring” differences between people.54

A relationship exists between citizenship activity and learning, reinforcing each other and
resulting in a developmental cycle55.
Adult education for democratic citizenship challenges and questions in a very critical way
established assumptions about teaching, learning, empowerment and capacity building. There
is still a lot of exploratory learning and research to be done.

Adults are very pragmatic, selective and “choosy” learners. A determined search for new
models of actual life situations needs to made. Participative learning drawing on experience,
may well be the way forward in civic education for a committed, democratic, pluralist society.

54
Pineau, G., Vers un Paradigme de Recherche-Formation en Réseau, in Estado Actual da Investigação em
Ciências da Educação, Porto. 1994,Soc. Port. de C. Da Educação
55
Forrester, K., and Carey, L., Citizenship and Learning: a Draft Synthesis Report on Sites of Citizenship,
Strasbourg , 1999, Council of Europe Doc. DECS/CIT (97) 23
 56

PART 2
METHODS AND PRACTICES
2.1. Education for democratic citizenship – general characteristics
The main purpose of education for democratic citizenship is to promote, strengthen and
protect the democratic culture of rights and responsibilities seen as the key to efficient and
sustainable voluntary action of citizens. It is, therefore, linked to one'
s knowledge of and
commitment to shared democratic values, as well as to democratic institutions and procedures
that guarantee the protection and further improvement of these values. In addition, it aims at
providing life-long opportunities for acquiring, implementing and disseminating relevant
information, values, skills and practices in a broad range of formal and non-formal
educational environments (see reports from Bîrzea, 199656; Veldhius, 199757; Audigier,
199958).

Education for democratic citizenship relates to (see Picture 5 for a more detailed
explanation):
• multi-perspective, interdisciplinary and contextual approach to teaching and learning for
democratic change;
• development and combination of specific cognitive, affective and practical skills and
competencies that enable the individual to respond better to the needs of participative
democracy and its risks;
• lifelong acquisition, acceptance, implementation, and further strengthening of citizens'
rights and responsibilities;
• empowerment, understood in terms of individual and collective capacity for action and
change based on an increased awareness of socially important choices;
• environment that recognises and further develops horizontal patterns of interdependency
of the individual and the group;
• conditions that help restore social ties by promoting citizens'multiple identities and
social inclusion;

56
Birzea, C. Education for Democratic Citizenship - Consultation Meeting: General Report. Strasbourg:
Council of Europe, 1996, document DECS/CIT (96) 1.
57
Veldhuis, R. Education for Democratic Citizenship: Dimensions of Citizenship, Core Competencies,
Variables and International Activities. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1997, document DECS/CIT (97) 23.
58
Audigier, F. Concepts de base et compétences-clés de l'education à la citoyanneté démocratique: Une
deuxième synthèse. Strasbourg: Conseil de l'
Europe, 1999, document DECSEDU/CIT (99) 53.
 57

EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRATIC CITIZENSHIP

ASPECTS OF THE PROCESS:

PARADIGMAS: goal setting APPROACH:
target groups
constructivism interdisciplinarity
content and method selection
interactionism multiperspectiveness
implementation strategies
mediators
organisation and management
resources,
guidance and counselling
monitoring and assessment
research and innovation

GOALS:
MEDIATING VALUES: MEDIATING AGENTS:
empowerment
human rights and freedoms responsibility schools/teachers
the rule of law participation civil (learning) society
equality co-operation family
pluralism work-place
inclusion
participative democracy media
social cohesion
sustainable development interest groups

KEY DIMENSIONS
TARGET GROUPS: OF DEVELOPMENT: SETTINGS:
students knowledge (concepts and formal
youth values) non-formal
adults skills informal
attitudes and action

STRATEGIES:
multidimensional and multifactor
partnerships and co-operation

SUSTAINABLE SUPPORT SYSTEM:

statement of priority
stable resources
identification and prevention of obstacles
Picture 5: Education for democratic citizenship: A systemic outlook
 58

• co-operation and partnership in designing and implementing educational strategies for

the attainment of civil society'
s goals, between all players and sectors at local, national
and international level.

Education for democratic citizenship fulfils its purpose by promoting a three-dimensional

development in the individual:
• cognitive (understanding the concepts and values of democracy and their functioning);
• social (acquisition of skills and competencies that facilitate social skills and actions in
various settings throughout life);
• affective (internalisation of concepts as values that are the basis of pro-social attitudes and
actions).

In the course of the Project, two classifications of core competencies needed for effective
participation in democracy and civil society were proposed. They function as tentative
frameworks for the scope and aims of education for democratic citizenship.

In the classification offered by R. Veldhuis59 competencies (knowledge; attitudes and

opinions; intellectual and participatory skills) are linked to the different dimensions of
citizenship. He outlines a maximum and a minimum package of core competencies. The
maximum package consists of:
a) political and legal dimension that encompasses knowledge, skills, attitudes and
practices linked to the functioning of political and legal systems;
b) social dimension that includes competencies that are important for promoting social
relations;
c) economic dimension that encompasses specific competencies important for
economic and market functioning;
d) cultural dimension, which refers to competencies that are important for
understanding and using cultural heritage in all its diversity.

Categories of competencies defined by F. Audigier60 are:

a) cognitive competencies - include competencies of a legal and political nature;
knowledge of the world affairs; competencies of a procedural nature; and
knowledge of the principles and values of human rights and democratic citizenship;
b) affective competencies and choice of values - refer to conviction and adherence to the
principles promoted by education for democratic citizenship, e.g. freedom, equality
and solidarity;
c) capacities for action - relate to the capacity to live and co-operate with others;
capacity to resolve conflicts in accordance with the principles of democratic law;
and the capacity to participate in public debate.

Taking into account these conclusions, the following is an outline of the concepts and values,
as well as skills and attitudes whose development is crucial in teaching and learning for
democratic citizenship.

59
Veldhuis, R. Education for Democratic Citizenship: Dimensions of Citizenship, Core Competencies,
Variables and International Activities. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1997, document DECS/CIT (97) 23.
60
Audigier, F. Concepts de base et compétences-clés de l'education à la citoyanneté démocratique: Une
deuxième synthése. Strasbourg: Conseil de l'
Europe, 1999, document DECSEDU/CIT (99) 53.
 59

2.1.1. Core Concepts/Values

Democratic citizenship education consists of a set of concepts or core values common to all
modern democracies. A proper understanding of these concepts/values and their relationships
in the context of rapid change and risk is the precondition for a citizens'responsible and
productive participation in the process of democratic reconstruction. Some of the core
concepts are:

• human rights and freedoms (universality, indivisibility and inalienability of rights and
freedoms, international human rights standards; international human rights law; inherited
rights; institutions and procedures for promoting and protecting human rights);
• democracy (institutions and procedures; representative and participative democracy;
democratic freedoms) and democratic principles (the rule of law, social justice; equality,
pluralism; social cohesion; inclusion; protection of minorities; solidarity; peace, stability
and security);
• citizen (empowerment and responsibility; active participation);
• civil society (principles, institutions and procedures of a civil society; empowerment of
the civil sector; relationship to the state);
• globalisation (types of globalisation; independence and interdependence);
• development (sustainable changes).

2.1.2. Skills

Whether and how the concepts and human/democratic values will be used depends to a great
extent on the development of certain skills, such as:

A) Basic skills
• skills of critical and argumentative thinking
• creative and productive skills
• problem-solving skills
• assessment and evaluation skills
• knowledge application/procedural skills
• moral reasoning skills

B) Specific skills involved in social conduct

• participative skills
• multiple communication skills
• co-operative and team-work skills
• debating, negotiating and compromising skills
• intercultural skills
• conflict-prevention and conflict-resolution skills
• mediation and facilitation skills
• assertiveness skills
• democratic leadership skills
• lobbying skills.
 60

2.1.3. Attitudes

Besides understanding core concepts and values and having basic skills for active and
responsible participation, the citizen needs a full range of competencies for democratic
citizenship. This also includes pro-social and pro-active attitudes, usually defined in terms of
involvement in or commitment (respect, attachment, defence of) to something that is
recognised as of universal value in society. Among them are:
• commitment to the principle of universality, interdependence and indivisibility of human
rights and freedoms;
• belief in individual worth, dignity and freedom;
• commitment to the rule of law, justice, equality and equity in a world of differences;
• commitment to peace and to participative, non-violent and constructive solutions to social
problems;
• belief in the usefulness of democratic principles, institutions and procedures as well as in
the importance of civil action;
• respect for different cultures and their contribution to humanity; adherence to the
principle of pluralism in life;
• commitment to the value of mutual understanding, co-operation, trust and solidarity, and
to combating racism, prejudice and discrimination;
• belief in the importance of personal responsibility and accountability;
• commitment to the principle of sustainable human development understood in terms of
the balance between social, environmental and economic growth.

2.2. Skills and competencies of the actors in education for

democratic citizenship

2.2.1. The Learner and the "Teacher"

As a multifaceted and a multidimensional approach, education for democratic citizenship

aims at replacing traditional teaching-learning in which the teacher' s role is reduced to
transmitting knowledge and skills and the student' s role to listening and, hopefully, to
acquiring the content of the transmission. Education for democratic citizenship presupposes a
wide range of possibilities for learning that exist in a "learning society". It crosses over the
borders of school and the community and challenges divisions between formal and non-
formal education, between curricular and extra-curricular activities as well as between
schooling and socialisation. It, therefore, promotes reciprocity of learning and teaching and
incites permanent exchanges of teachers'and students'roles. At the same time, by focusing on
the acquisition of skills and competencies that enable social action and change, education for
democratic citizenship retains all the characteristics of a purposeful human endeavour that
combines sophisticated theory with public discourse.

In this context, teachers appear more as organisers of multiple learning opportunities and as
bridges between society' s resources and their users. They mediate and facilitate access to
information and permanently keep abreast of new social, political and technological
challenges, as well as the growing needs of their learners. Learners also actively participate in
the decision making of the educational process by co-deciding the contents, methods and
 61

strategies for teaching/learning for democratic citizenship. Teaching thus becomes an

interactive process in which educational goals are negotiated and in which different
experiences are exchanged and shared collectively.

Reciprocity marks the whole process, including assessment and evaluation. Two-way
assessment and the use of qualitative data to measure the results of learning, have a profound
impact on teaching and learning. Such practice makes both teachers and learners responsible
for educational action and its results.

The traditional roles and competencies of teachers and students is modified. Changes in
traditional teacher'
s competencies refer to:
• compartmentalised vs. interdisciplinary knowledge on: subject matter; theories and issues
of human nature and growth; adequacy of different learning theories for particular
educational goals (behaviouristic, cognitive, humanistic); principles of teaching/learning
process; and the organisation and management of group activities;
• linear and static vs. multiple and dynamic teaching process in all its dimensions,
including: a) planning or setting diversified goals; b) flexible management of classes and
groups; c) diversified instructional models, from direct teaching, through to open
education and co-operative learning; and d) sensitive and reciprocal assessment and
evaluation
• cognitive vs. multiple education goals that match complexity and change in a modern
world and focus on individual commitment to improving living conditions and mastering
skills necessary for action.

One of the most important abilities in teaching is effectiveness, i.e. her/his belief that students
can learn and that she/he can teach or help them learn.61 In learning for democratic citizenship
there are other teaching abilities that can be crucial in the process of helping learners become
responsible citizens:
• ability to see the problem from the learner' s perspective with respect to his background,
age and level of education, as well as the ability to assess different positions and
perceptions non-prejudicially;
• ability to perceive, accept and feel respect for similarities and differences between the
teacher and the learners and among the learners;
• respect for the rights of learners and sensitivity to their needs and interests;
• capacity to deal with controversial issues and challenge ambiguous and complex
situations in the context of class or school;
• ability to see himself/herself, as well as the learners as active in the local, national and
global community;
• belief that things can be better and that everyone can make a difference;
• ability to integrate his/her own priorities into a shared framework of issues and values, as
well as to act on learners'decisions;
• willingness to admit mistakes in front of the group and to learn from them;
• ability to bring up and discuss openly the problems imposed by hidden curriculum.

61
McIlrath, D. and Huitt, W. The Tecahing/Learning Process: A Discussion of Models. Valdosta: GA: Valdosta
State University, 1995.
 62

It goes without saying that these competencies influence the development of learners,
particularly their self-respect, open-mindedness, motivation, appreciation of differences,
fairness, creative sense of curiosity and, above all, their willingness to participate and co-
operate in group matters. By exercising the freedom to participate in daily institutional
activities, students cross over their traditional roles. They, themselves, become instructors to
their teachers: they provide feedback, challenge their routine work, and make them restructure
teaching in a way more appropriate to the group. Consequently, schools become more and
more places of learning linked to other areas in society as a whole and less the institutions of
teaching formal knowledge and skills that compartmentalise individual and social issues.

The most crucial and probably decisive competencies of both "learners" and "teachers" in
creating and maintaining an interactive class and learning environment in school are:
• critical thinking - ability to find, analyse and select information using interdisciplinary
knowledge, multiple skills, and a critical approach; making informed decisions based on
evidence and changing position in face of a valid argument;
• creative thinking - ability to find new and non-habitual ways of putting facts together in a
problem-solving process that minimises over-generalisations, prejudices and stereotypes;
• pro-social and pro-society thinking - ability to analyse facts and issues and make choices
in relation to the needs of others and society as a whole, combating egotism and
ethnocentrism; openness to speak to others and learn from different experiences;
• future-oriented thinking - ability to perceive problems and evaluate decisions in the light
of experience in order to develop a more equitable future.

2.2.2. School and the society

The school is an important social institution. And like any other social institution – the
family, the churches etc. – its purpose can be basically defined as a place where learning
activities take place such as transferring knowledge, norms of behaviour and values. It is
also, where the dominant culture and the social structure of the surrounding society is
reproduced. Therefore, it supplies identity and purpose in the functioning of society. For the
learner, school also acts as an important “socialisation factor”.

Finally, school in most cases is a governmental agency and is by necessity an administration

or bureaucracy – a factor that is critically important in the understanding of its inherent
authoritative structure, its dependency on laws and by-laws, curricular decision-making and
administrative functions.
 63

2.2.2.1 Basic functions of school

The school fulfils its basic functions in three ways:

Firstly, school transfers knowledge and competencies to the next generation that enables its
members to participate in the social, political, economic and cultural life of the society and
carry out “real” tasks in their professional lives. This requires basic competencies like
reading, writing, mathematics, cultural skills, qualifications needed for work and other “key
qualifications” like co-operation, team spirit, fairness etc. In a more general sense, school
contributes in an important way to the formation of “human capital” in a society.

Secondly, the School contributes to an unequal distribution of social status in society and,
therefore, influences the “opportunities” of individuals through life. The educational
achievements of pupils and students determine future careers by placing them, according to
their intellectual capabilities, on different levels in higher education and, finally, in careers
and jobs. This particular process is characterised as the “school function of selection and
allocation”: Society reproduces its own social structure according to the results of selection in
the school system. The result is social inequality, which is being justified, in open and liberal
societies, by the difference in capabilities and achievements of the individuals62.

Thirdly, however, because of its mandatory character, school also has an important role to
play in the process of social and political integration. Formally, this was achieved in many
subjects through national, regional or local curricula and through certain basic orientations.
Furthermore, school itself conveys open and hidden norms and patterns of behaviour, some of
which are codified (like school by-laws, codes of behaviour etc.), while others are more or
less informal in nature (like certain patterns of interaction and communication between
teachers and students). In his Theory of the School, Fend calls this the social “function of
legitimation and integration” of the school.63

2.2.2.2 The “Socialisation Function” of school

Considering these three basic functions, it becomes obvious that the role of school is not
limited to “systematic organisation of learning processes”, but is also directed to providing a
much wider social, political, economic and cultural orientation to the life of the students. As a
place where different genders, age groups, religious confessions and, increasingly, ethnic
groups and cultures meet on a daily and continuing basis, school offers numerous
opportunities for social learning and practical social experience.

62
See Hans Peter Henecka, Schule als Institution und Lebenswelt, in: Gerd Hepp/Herbert Schneider, Schule in
der Bürgergesellschaft , Schwalbach/Ts., 1999, p. 64 ff.
63
Helmut Fend, Theorie der Schule, München, Wien, Baltimore, 1980.
 64

The three elements in the “socialisation effect” of school are:

Firstly, school is situated at a critical point in the child’s development. The decision to leave
the family in order to regularly attend another institution is not a voluntary one. The child’s
membership of the “ School System ” is enforced by law and, as a rule, without much
consideration of either personal preferences or social connections (friendships). Considering
the child’s previous environment and living conditions, school might even be termed an
“extra-territorial” institution, not only in geographical terms but also in terms of the degree of
conformity, self-restraint and discipline enforced therein. The role of a student requires
further adaptation. Power and authority of strangers need to be accepted, standards of
behaviour and orientation need to be learnt. School standards of behaviour are less flexible 64
than in most families.

Secondly, the relationship between the learner and transmitter (i.e. teacher) is characterised by
relatively rigid expectations of the latter with regard to the learner’s performance and his or
her behaviour. Criteria like discipline, pressure, the application of sanctions etc. are key
(positive as well as negative) elements of this process. The rules of communication that
prevail are of critical importance in school. These rules are often at variance with established
patterns outside the school (i.e. the family, but in particular youth cultures and peer groups)
and are therefore frequently seen as inflexible, restrictive and even contradictory. The
complexity of formal and informal rules, regulations, routines and procedures prevalent
within school could be seen as constituting a “hidden curriculum” – a training where the pupil
learns how to adapt to these regulations. The apparent unanimity achieved in this process –
between the transmitter and the learner – is not necessarily real; more often than not, it is the
result of authority and sanctions.65

Thirdly, school is increasingly burdened with additional tasks outside its original mandate.
With the dramatic increase in divorce, broken homes and families, one-parent-families and
problems like alcohol, drug abuse, crime and violence, the teacher often needs to spend a
considerable amount of time dealing with socio-psychological problems, either advising or
even as a kind of therapist – for which he or she is neither qualified nor has the time66 , nor
the motivation.

Yet as a social institution, school is subjected to the general conditions of social change and
the school or the teacher must adapt to psychological and even therapeutic needs as other
socialising agents fail in their functions or are simply no longer accepted.

Modern societies are burdened with a decline in the trust people place in institutions and in
each other. The “socialising function” of school, therefore, needs to be re-directed at creating
an atmosphere of trust.

64
Cf. Henecka 1999, p. 72.
65
Cf. Henecka 1999, p. 74 ff.
66
Cf. Henecka 1999, p. 73.
 65

2.2.3. The individual and society

As mentioned above, modern societies suffer from a decrease of trust in institutions and
among people. As democracies, they also suffer from a decrease in the level of participation
from voting to voluntary actions, increasing apathy in political matters and from the wide-
spread idea that “one’s opinion does not matter anymore”. 67

The preparation of young people in the role of citizens in a democratic society is a central task
in the education process, and in particular, Education for Democracy. The aim of such
education is to empower the individual for “responsible and informed citizenship”. Such
citizenship is an inherent part of “civil society”; the general key requirements for civil society
are:
• self-organisation: the structure of small, independent, voluntary organisations set up by
individuals with the purpose of solving community problems.
• community spirit: this refers to classical civic virtues, the acceptance of responsibility in a
society or community, but also the support given by the community to activities that aim
at the “empowerment” of people.
• voluntary civic engagement: participation cannot be limited to voting; it is an on-going
process of speaking out in public matters and decisions. It means that political decision-
making and social activities should be seen as mutually supportive in problem-solving;
voluntary engagement can play an essential role in the process while at the same time
freeing governmental resources for other purposes.
• civic competence: this requires interest in the political process, readiness to participate,
contributions to or even membership of political parties, voluntary groups and
associations. Civic competence should not be confused with political competence – the
ability to understand and discuss political issues on an informed basis.
• a culture of dialogue and communication: communication is essential in any modern
society, but in public it needs to be structured and organised, particularly for controversial
issues. The individual needs to acquire basic communicative skills in order to be articulate
in a fast moving dialogue.
• tolerance of others and the ability to compromise: controversial issues require a form of
exchange that is based on the ability to accept compromise. And since most modern
societies are multicultural in character, compromise involves also some form of
recognition of other cultures and attitudes.

The responsibilities of individuals towards society do not come about naturally or

automatically, they need to be taught and learnt. Education for Democracy acts as a mediator
in the process of knowledge building required for participation in a civil society and for
preparation of a social link to participate in all fields of life. If, as seems to be the case,
modern civil societies require more participative and better informed citizens, then the
educational processes that empower people for such participation need to be adapted to the
new demands.

67
There are numerous contributions and papers to this aspect of declining trust and participation which is, in
fact, one of the core issues of the Communitarism debate. See, for example, Robert D. Putnam, “Bowling Alone:
America’s Declining Social Capital”, in: Journal of Democracy, 6, January 1995, pp. 65-78.
 66

2.3. Education for Democratic Citizenship Methodology – An

Overview
2.3.1 The interdependence of objectives, content and methodology to
Education for Democratic Citizenship

All methodological decisions made about the teaching and learning processes concerning
EDC must be seen in a wider context i.e. the way in which these processes affect the way
citizenship is understood, experienced and practised at present and in the future. The
methodology of EDC is, therefore, a complex issue that involves policy and curricular
decisions on a national, regional and local level as well as pedagogical decisions made by the
transmitter in the learning environment. Increasingly, however, the methodology of EDC is
also influenced by external factors, such as the experience of learners, the information they
receive from the media and other active agencies outside the formal learning environment.

Against this background, it becomes clear that all methodological decisions in EDC involve a
variety of (given) conditional factors as well as variables.

- Conditional factors, such as:

– age group of the learner
– ndividual learning abilities
– socio-economical background
– pre-formed knowledge
– socialisation experience

- Variables, such as:

– level of interest in EDC
– motivation
– needs
– learning methods
– social perspectives (social climate in the learning environment; future life
chances)
– social experience and communication
– barriers to learning)

It should be remembered, therefore, that the “methods” of EDC are not simplified concepts of
“how to teach”, i.e. teacher-centred or didactic forms of instruction.

What characterises the modern debate about Education for Democratic Citizenship is its
widely held perception as a “ pedagogical concept ”, comprising:
- considered selection of a topic or subject-matter
- formulation of transmitting process objectives
- organisation of the learning process and the selection of a teaching strategy
- presentation of contents
- evaluation of the outcomes.
 67

Modern teaching is not restricted to a single form of pedagogical strategy or method; rather, it
involves multiple approaches, frequently more than three or four are employed in a single
learning session.68 As numerous studies have pointed out, multiple teaching strategies
enhance student learning. The question remains, however, what “mix” of teaching strategies
should be applied and whether they are adequate for the learner, the learning environment and
the resources available for the support of the learning process.

2.3.2 Selection of subject-matter

Topic selection depends on five issues:

- information about the topic available and/or needed by the transmitter;
- relevance of the topic to the learner (“Will the topic enhance his/her future life chances
and/or civic competencies?”);
- transmitter’s expectation of the learner’s interest;
- socio-economic background of the learner;
- (formal and institutionalised educational settings) curricular requirements regarding the
subject-matter.

2.3.3 Formulation of objectives in the transmitting process

Basic aims or objectives of the transmitting process should be formulated in accordance with
the conditional factors and variables listed above. Central Objectives for all teaching and
learning in EDC are:
- ability to analyse actual social and political problems and conflicts;
- acquisition of historical background knowledge;
- ability for reflection and criticism;
- training for autonomous learning, self-directed research and in-depth studies;
- training for practical participation and socio-political activities.

2.3.4 Organisation of the transmitting process

Any transmitting or teaching strategy should reflect four issues:

- adequacy of the transmitting process to the selected subject-matter;
- adequacy of thematic complexity regarding the conditional factors that influence the
learner (see above);
- applicability of didactic principles to the subject-matter;
- availability of resources required for supporting the transmitting process (materials,
media, information).

68
See Murray Print et al. (Eds.), Civic Education for Civil Society, Asean Academic Press/Civitas International,
London 1999, p. 82.
 68

2.3.5 Methods for presenting the subject-matter

The forms chosen for the presentation of subject-matter will, of course, ultimately depend on
the educational setting, the objectives, time, resources and the media available at the time.
However, some of the most frequently used methods in the presentation of EDC topics
include “experience-based methods”, “media-supported methods”, and “analysis-based
methods”. The following are examples:

Experience-based methods
Forms of experience:
- "pre-existing" experience (totality of experience previously acquired by pupils and their
role-expectations in family, peer-groups, school, public life etc.)
- "instructed" experience (experience acquired by reading literature and text-books, by the
media, classroom materials etc.)
- "collective" experience (experience based on the teaching process, collective activities
inside and outside the classroom)

Methods applied:
- Real encounters with other people (observation, interviews, surveys, consulting experts
etc.)
- Simulation (role play, simulated planning, hearings, debates, court trial simulations etc.)
- Production (of newsletters, texts, films, videos, theatre plays, posters etc.)

Media supported methods

Basic issues involved:
The media represents real situations but interpretations by learners differ. The impact of
the media on the learner depends also on its proximity and availability.
The media can simultaneously be either a topic of EDC (i.e. the influence of media on
everyday life, on professions, the society etc.), a means in the learning process (the media
creates access to completely new forms of teaching and learning (communication over
large distances), or the subject of debate and criticism (criticism of media by the learner,
discussion of consequences of media use by children etc.).

Forms of Media:
- Printed media (textbooks, materials, photocopies, cartoons, statistics etc.)
– Audio-visual media (videos, cassettes, films)
- Online media (computer programmes, Internet, E-mail)

Media-supported forms:
- Reading, interpreting, analysing
- Consuming or producing audio-visual media
- Using or establishing chat-groups

Methodological issues involved:

– What contents are presented by the medium?
– What are the objectives?
– How does the medium present the contents (selection of topics, images used,
combination of image and speech)
 69

– Is media-supported learning better suited to the topic and to the objectives of the
learning process?
– What are the underlying social and political arguments presented by the media?
In what classroom situations can/should media be used?
What preparation and follow-up work will be necessary?
How should the media influence learning behaviour / results?
What effects do the media have on the communication process and on co-operation in
groups of learners and between learners and transmitters?
What is the relationship between the medium and other forms of knowledge transfer?

Analysis-based methods
Case Studies: description, presentation, analysis of concrete social, political, economic or
legal problems/issues
- motivation for the topic and spontaneous reaction
- description of the issue
- presentation and discussion
- development of solutions
- discussion of solutions
- analysis of consequences

Text Analysis: Analysis and interpretation of newspaper articles, actual or historical

documents, etc.

Media Analysis: Discovery of media presentation techniques, manipulative techniques,

analysis of latent political intentions in media presentations etc.

Statistical Analysis: How are statistics understood; how is data collected; how are
longer-term trends interpreted etc.

2.3.6 Evaluation of the results

The general strategy and approaches chosen for the transmitting process will ultimately
influence the expected results. If, in our highly developed information societies, complaints
are expressed about the overwhelming abundance of information in everyday life, then a
possible solution to this problem can be provided by applying the principle of “ selecting
exemplary issues”. Case studies and model concepts are methods that enable “learning by
direct experience” and, therefore, the acquisition of key skills in understanding issues of
democracy and civil society. A desirable result of such a learning process would be for the
learner to feel more confident and more independent about acquiring information and
conducting further research.

Similarly, if a problem-oriented approach is adopted, results would only concern certain

objectives of education for democratic citizenship: problem-solving thinking development;
experience and awareness of key problems that exist in society; analytical skills for the
evaluation of key problems. With this approach, problems in politics or society form the main
content in the transmitting process. A problem exists if and when an individual is confronted
with a situation that has undesirable origins and/or consequences and a rational solution is
 70

difficult to find. If the teaching approach is directed at such problems, then the learner should
be given skills that enable him or her to analyse the conditions that led to the creation of such
problems and to developing possible solutions.

Controversial learning can be considered as a key area in education for democratic

citizenship methodology; in fact, it might even be a key element in the teacher’s professional
identity and ethos. If an issue is controversial in the wider political and social environment, it
must also be treated as controversial in the educational setting. Due to the pluralism that
governs modern democratic societies, almost all issues and problems are discussed in a
controversial way. In the educational setting, however, this situation requires great flexibility,
tolerance and sensitivity on the part of the transmitter in order to avoid one-sided and biased
interpretations of subject-matter. The results of such learning are difficult to “measure”, but
the ability to reflect on both sides of an argument and the skill to participate in a discussion
without trying to “overwhelm” the participants are necessary for any political problem or
decision-making process and are therefore important for responsible citizenship.

A “pedagogical approach” to education for democratic citizenship inevitably takes into

account interests and inclinations of the learner. A “learner-oriented approach”, therefore, is
the direct alternative to the “teacher-centred approach” that was prevalent in almost all
teaching during the 1950s and 1960s. A central element of the “learner-oriented approach” is
to enable enlightenment without ideological taboos, critical and self-directed reflection about
political issues and development of self-directed activities. Ultimately, an important result of
such an approach is the development of critical and independent thinking which is
indispensable for democratic participation.

Likewise, other methodological approaches to education for democratic citizenship, e.g.

“action-oriented approach” or the “science-oriented approach”, are alternatives that can be
applied in various educational settings, both in the classroom as well as in adult education.
However, the selection of such methodologies must fulfil the “second step” in the education
for democratic citizenship learning process: The first step being the selection of the subject-
matter, which, as stated above, depends in turn on general curricular or wider educational
requirements. In other words: to achieve the best results, all methodological aspects listed
above must be seen as mutually dependant. It would be incoherent to select a learning strategy
that involves an active, practical and participative approach if the subject-matter was highly
academic or strictly theoretical in nature.

2.4. Conditions for Edc

2.4.1. School related conditions

Schooling and formal education is continually criticised for not properly preparing citizens
for confronting the challenges and risks of modern life and the question should be asked
whether education for democratic citizenship can be correctly set up in the contemporary
school environment. Also, what kind of support system for learning democratic citizenship
could be created? What should be done in order to make the idea work; to ensure education
for democratic citizenship is not a mere cosmetic modification of teaching content but a
 71

multidimensional structural change in education essential in the transformation of both "new"

and "old" democracies? How much can be achieved and how sensitive should the changes
be?

Education for democratic citizenship has developed as a bottom-up approach to education in

Europe and should remain so during implementation. There is no a recipe for further
conceptual development and implementation but only a tentative framework of ideas based
on the principles of responsibility, participation and creativity. Some of the ideas crucial for
the implementation of education for democratic citizenship are:
• decentralisation and transparency in decision making in formal education, including
curriculum design;
• participation and co-operation of teachers, students, pupils, parents, NGOs and other
voluntary agents in developing formal education for democratic citizenship programmes;
introduction of a negotiated agenda for changes in education with an aim to strengthen
citizens'responsibility for strengthening democracy and civil society;
• responsibility and accountability of all segments of society for designing and
implementing formal education for democratic citizenship policies and programmes;
• legal, political and financial support for the reorganisation and restructuring of schools
according to the principles underlying education for democratic citizenship, including
new forms of legal provisions and innovative forms of school and education funding on
local, national, regional and global level;
• promote openness in schools to flexible school-community relations on different levels,
including networking; students'and teachers'visits and exchanges in the country and
abroad; students' involvement in projects and associations outside classrooms and
schools; partnerships with voluntary sector, local leaders and educational research
institutions; fostering co-operation and support from national and international
organisations;
• continuing in-service training of teachers, school administration and school specialists
(psychologists, pedagogues, social workers and medical staff);
• creation of opportunities for teachers'self-development, their ability to deal with the
particular needs of their students, the purpose of education, school objectives, etc.;
• development of students’ rights and responsibilities in school and out-of-school, including
the protection of these rights and assuring students'responsibilities;
• promote continuous assessment, evaluation and development of education for democratic
citizenship programmes and projects, as well as other innovative approaches in education.

2.4.2. Society related conditions

The conditions for EDC related to society at large are difficult to define or even describe
because they might vary with the political systems in Europe. Generally speaking, however,
any truly democratic system and society must be able to create a social order that enables all
citizens not only to participate, but also acquire the knowledge and competencies
indispensable for informed and responsible participation.

Furthermore, these opportunities for the acquisition of knowledge, skills and competencies
must be offered at all levels of society:
 72

- interpersonal relationships (family, friends, neighbours)

- institutions (governmental agencies, schools, universities)
- voluntary and non-governmental organisations and associations
- economic organisations (companies, trade unions, employer organisations)
- religious, cultural or ethnic organisations.

In other words: The conditions for EDC are characterised to a large extent by the ability and
willingness of individuals and institutions at all levels of society to participate in the creation
of a viable civil society. In order to achieve this objective, several conditions related to
society are suggested:
- The relationship between civil society and EDC should not be seen as a “one-way road”
but as a mutually beneficial undertaking.
- In this context, EDC should not be re-active (i.e. merely reacting to social change when or
after it occurred) but rather pro-active, formative and anticipatory, aiming at further
development of society.
- EDC – qualifying people for self-determination, participation and solidarity –not only
provides essential basic qualifications but also a wide range of theoretical and practical
knowledge. In this respect, EDC suffers from a lack of recognition. Therefore, the
institutional and organisational conditions of EDC must be expanded considerably. EDC
must be given a much higher importance in educational and political planning.
- These objectives cannot be fulfilled by a top-down-process but must be approached from
the bottom up. One crucial element is for all educators involved to continue further
education, another is to create strong co-operation between governmental institutions and
non-governmental organisations on a local level as a source of innovation, creativity and
the exchange of experience.

2.5. Guiding principles (Conclusions)

• Education for democratic citizenship is understood as an innovative approach to teaching

and learning in modern societies. It is primarily concerned with discovering efficient ways
for preparing citizens to meet the challenges and risks in a changing democracy by
promoting knowledge and skills necessary for productive and responsible involvement in
matters of common concern. Therefore, innovative practices and bottom-up initiatives are
indispensable for efficient learning of democratic citizenship in all educational and
training environments (from schools of all levels and types, communities, workplaces and
adult education), i.e. throughout life. This presupposes reciprocity in school-community-
workplace relations: greater openness and responsiveness of schools to the community
and the work environment, and greater concern for the tasks schools set out to achieve
from the community and the workplace.
 73

EDC - in a nutshell

• deeply rooted in the idea of Europe as an integrated and culturally diverse area of democratic
stability;
• multifaceted and multidimensional innovative bottom-up approach to facilitating active
participation in democracy;
• aims at helping pupils, young people and adults participate actively, creatively and responsibly in
decision-making processes;
• provides life-long opportunities for acquiring, applying and transmitting information, values and
skills in a broad range of formal and non-formal educational and training contexts;
• presupposes the use of a wide range of possibilities for learning that exist in a "learning society";
• crosses over the borders between school and community and challenges the divisions between
formal, non-formal and in-formal education, between curricular and extra-curricular activities as
well as between schooling and socialisation;
• promotes reciprocity of learning and teaching and incites permanent exchanges of teachers'and
students'roles;
• strengthens a dynamic and sustainable democratic culture based on awareness and commitment to
shared fundamental values: human rights and freedoms, equality of difference and the rule of law
• strengthens social cohesion and solidarity and promotes inclusive strategies for all groups and
sectors in a multicultural society.

It also implies greater belief in the value and importance of individual potential for
democratic development and the power of education to strengthen such potential.
Individual responsibility for common goals and acceptance of democratic values, is only
possible if a spirit of confidence is present in citizens and responsibility is reflected at all
levels of society. It is important that education for democratic citizenship helps learners
not only to acquire knowledge about core concepts and values, but also to develop skills
and attitudes for promoting them, in particular by removing the constraints of false
authority, conformity and prejudice, as well as the mechanisms of rationalisation and
justification of racism, ethnocentrism and other forms of social oppression,
discrimination and injustice. The main purpose of learning about and learning for
democratic citizenship is the strengthening of civil society in which all citizens are able
to learn throughout life by being able to live in a democratic environment.

• Education for democratic citizenship is based on knowledge, skills and personal

commitment. It starts with the presumption that only an informed and knowledgeable
citizen can properly meet the needs of an expanding civil society. However, it stresses the
importance of combining declarative, procedural and constructive knowledge, of
understanding basic concepts, as well as of acquiring basic skills and developing pro-
social attitudes that guarantee further promotion of democracy.

Since the complexity of society can only be grasped through knowledge, it is necessary
that education nurtures different perceptions and worldviews, inclusive multiple identities,
a non-ethnocentric understanding of social reality and a non-anthropocentric vision of
social development. It means that instead of a compartmentalisation, an inter-disciplinary
and contextual approach should be promoted in institutions. Formal, non-formal and
informal education initiatives should be carried out to enable learners not only to know
what to do but to know how and why actions should be performed. Possessing multiple
 74

procedural knowledge and skills is the best measure of one' s empowerment and the best
means for fostering responsibility and sensitivity in democratic change.

• The central notion in learning for democratic citizenship is an empowered citizen who is
responsible for autonomous actions and relations with other citizens, groups and
institutions in a civil society69. This implies that the results of learning for democratic
citizenship depend to a great extent on the educational resources in society. This relates
primarily to teachers' professional knowledge and skills in dealing with individual
differences as well as on their capabilities for exchanging information openly and
respecting students'future roles in society. The spirit of mediation, negotiation and
exchange of ideas and practices in constructing a shared culture of rights and
responsibilities, of mutual reinforcement, as well as of joint responsibility for the results,
is of a paramount importance in learning for democratic citizenship.

• Citizenship sites are one of the many ways in which the school, the local community, the
local administration and the workplace can co-operate to discover the ever-changing ways
for developing best concepts and practices in citizens'preparation for democracy70. They
are multiform innovative practices initiated from within civil society. They are defined as
the "units" or "centres" of democratic development that modify a community' s power
relations by creating the conditions for citizens to be directly involved in the decision-
making processes. The key words in organising citizenship sites are autonomy,
empowerment, responsibility, participation, inclusion and cohesion. Through these
processes, citizenship sites create new forms of teaching and learning for participation in
civil life and, as such, serve as a model practice for encouraging democratic development
in other educational contexts.

Other innovative approaches, methods and strategies in teaching and learning have
appeared recently in almost all European countries. Many of them tend to encourage
active participation and the responsibility of learners as citizens. They focus on how
things are done and, thus, include personal experience, group work and participatory
activities. It is the task of each country to develop strategies for further development, to
monitor and assess these innovations and, if possible, to improve in order to make
education even more effective in attaining democratic citizenship goals.

• Education for democratic citizenship is not a ready-made model for democratic

development. It cannot be directly transmitted from one country to another. It must remain
a creative educational effort based on a country' s specific history and visions of
democratic development and on its human resources. However, co-operation, co-
ordination and partnerships of all kinds (horizontal and vertical) and at all levels in
developing and implementing programmes, activities and actions for education for
democratic citizenship is a European necessity. The outcomes of learning for democratic
citizenship should be measured in terms of the restoration of social ties, strengthening
social justice, renewing belief in democratic institutions, as well as promoting equitable

69
Empowerment and Responsibility: From Principle to Practice. Report from the Seminar. Delphi, 15-17
October, 1999. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1999, document CDCC/Delphes (99) 4.
70
Lamoureux, J. Conference on Citizenship Sites: General Report. Santander (Spain), 3-5 June 1999.
Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1999, document DECS/EDU/CIT (99) 48.
 75

and sustainable development.71 It should also be the instrument for narrowing the gap
between eastern and western countries that encompasses the economy and society. By
making citizens aware of the advantages of democratic change and the possible obstacles,
education for democratic citizenship can prepare them for effective action at different
levels of the decision-making processes.

• Multi-level partnerships and co-operation provide opportunities for the exchange of

ideas, trends, knowledge, and practices. It is therefore, necessary to strengthen intra-
institutional and inter-institutional links, nationally and internationally, including
partnerships between the private, civil and public sectors; between financial institutions,
schools, and voluntary associations; between teachers, students'and youth organisations,
adults and parents; between research, everyday practices and the media, etc., remembering
the development needs of countries in south-east Europe.

• The Council of Europe and the Council for Cultural Co-operation, in particular, should
put efforts into developing a culture of rights and responsibilities by means of promoting
teaching and learning for democratic citizenship in the member countries, activities
should include:72

Partnerships (information exchanges; co-operation in the development and

implementation of programmes; joint projects, in particular on a sub-regional basis, as
in south-east Europe):
a) intra-sector partnerships- between specialised committees on education, higher
education, research and culture;
b) inter-sector partnerships - in particular, between the Directorate for school, out-of-
school and higher Education and the Youth Directorate (DY) including the European
Youth Centres in Strasbourg and Budapest, links to the European Commission against
Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), the European Centre for Modern Languages,
c) inter-agency partnerships - including links to the European Commission
(Directorate General for Education and Culture), the European Training Foundation,
UNESCO, UNICEF, UNHCR, UNHCHR, OSCE and the World Bank; links to
institutions, such as, the Open Society Institute, CIVITAS, Kulturkontakt (Austria)
and Transeuropéenes, and links to other international structures, such as Stability Pact
for south-east Europe, the Enhanced Graz Process, the Royaumont Process, etc.;
d) partnerships with national and local authorities (ministries of education, youth and
culture and their local branches);
e) partnerships with educational institutions, voluntary associations and experts in
relevant fields promoting education for democratic citizenship;

71
Education for Democratic Citizenship and Social Cohesion. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1999, document
DECS/EDU/CIT (99) 60 rev.
72
See for more suggestions: Belanger, P. Conference on Education for Democratic Citizenship: Methods,
Practices and Strategies: Warsaw, 4-8 December, 1999: Final Report Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2000,
document DECS/EDU/CIT (2000) 4.
 76

Dissemination of information and materials

a) through European regional policies in education, youth, culture, new technologies,

media, social cohesion, etc. (conventions, declarations, recommendations and
conclusions of the Committee of Ministers, Parliamentary Assembly and the Congress
of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe),

b) through the Council of Europe's programmes/projects and their results:

- in the area of education and training, including teaching and learning for democratic
citizenship (Project on Education for Democratic Citizenship; European Studies for
Democratic Citizenship; History Teaching in Schools; Modern Language Project;
School Links and Exchanges, Europe at School; Programme on Democratic
Leadership); preparation of teachers (In-service Training Programme for Teachers),
students' and teachers' exchange (School-Based Exchange Programme); policy
assistance (The Legislative Reform Programme for Higher Education); academic
mobility and the recognition of qualifications;
- in the area of culture, (Project on Culture, Communication and New Technologies;
European Cultural Routes; Promoting Cultural Heritage; Action-oriented research
programme on culture and urban neighbourhoods; Project on Culture, Creativity and
Young People);
- in the youth field (The European Youth Campaign against Racism, Xenophobia, Anti-
Semitism and Intolerance; activities of the European Youth Centres);
- in other relevant fields, including minorities (Democracy, Human Rights and
Minorities Project

c) through the conclusions and recommendations adopted at the European regional

meetings, in particular regarding the Project on Education for Democratic Citizenship,
and the Enhanced Graz Process;

d) through innovations at sub-regional and national level: educational policies;

scientific research results; examples of good practice; teachers'and experts'personal
experiences;

Concerning the dissemination of information and materials, it is necessary to:

- make widely known and accessible the European Documentation and Information
System for Education (EUDISED);
- develop the European electronic data-bank and a resource centre for education for
democratic citizenship;
- promote a regional system of monitoring and evaluation based on systemic research
methods, particularly in reference to innovative theories, technologies, and practices.